,#Ji 

P)05>  HO  \ |^4  ' a/<2  \?ctC> 

OaJ 


THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  ILLINOIS 
LIBRARY 

le'SOA 

* it  ¥ $1  fin 

OfWVBBUV  U;  Ei»-m 

J.lTf  I ~B  J-sc^A.  .‘J" 


NON  CIRCULATING 

CHECK  FOR  UNBOUND 
CIRCULATING  COR^ 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/somecommonspraym1551  watk 


CIRCULARS 


of  the 

AGRICULTURAL  EXPERIMENT  STATION 
UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


CIRCULARS  155-184 


JANUARY  1912-1915 


URBANA 


1 feSO.I 

1. 

.V)  NS'S  — \ A 


TABLE  of  contents 


155 — Plant  food  in  relation  to  soil  fertility  by 
C.  G.  Hopkins 


156 —  Rice  blight  by  J.  S.  Collier 

157 —  Soil  fertility:  Illinois  conditions,  needs, 

and  future  prospects  by  C.  0.  Hopkins 

158 —  Tuberculosis  by  International  Commission  of 

the  American  Veterinary  Medical  Asso- 
ciation on  the  Control  of  Bovine  Tuber- 
culosis 


159 —  Tests  of  lime  sulfur,  bordeaux  mixture  and 

other  sprays  by  0.  S.  Watkins 

160 —  Some  common  spray  mixtures  by  0.  S.  Watkins 

161 —  Crowing  and  marketing  wool  by  W.  C.  Coffey 

162*— Care  of  milk  in  the  home  by  B.  R.  Rickards 
and  H.  N.  Parker 

163 —  Economic  factors  in  cattle  feeding:  I. 

Relation  of  the  United  States  to  the 
world’s  beef  supply  by  H.  W.  Mumford 
and  L.  D.  Hall 

164 —  Economic  factors  in  cattle  feeding:  II. 

Argentina  as  a factor  in  international 
trade  by  H.  W.  Mumford 

165 —  Shall  we  use  "complete"  commercial  fertili- 

zers in  the  com  belt?  by  C.  G.  Hopkins 

166 —  Method  for  the  improvement  of  buttermilk 

from  pasteurized  cream  by  LeRoy  Lang 

167 —  Illinois  system  of  permanent  fertility  by 

C.  G-.  Hopkins 


. 


. . • 


. 


. 


. 


. 


. 

. 


: 


. 


168— Bread  from  stones  by  C.  G.  Hopkins 

169 Economic  factors  in  cattle  feeding:  III 

Review  of  beef  production  in  the 
United  States  by  H.  W.  Murnford  and  L.  D. 
Hall 

170 —  "Illinois  Way"  of  beautifying  the  farm  by 

Wilhelm  Miller — bound  separately 

171 —  Late  broods  of  the  codling  moth  by  B.  S. 

Pickett 

172 —  Blight  of  apples,  pears,  and  quinces  by  B.  S. 

Pickett 

173 —  Onion  culture  by  J.  W.  Lloyd 

174 —  Testing  for  fat  in  milk  by  the  Babcock  test 

by  Department  of  Dairy  Husbandry 

175 —  Economic  factors  in  cattle  feeding:  IV  Cattle 

feeding  conditions  in  the  corn  belt  by 
H.  W.  Murnford  and  L.  D.  Hall 

176 —  Practical  help  on  landscape  gardening  by 

Wilhelm  Miller 

177 —  Relation  between  yields  and  prices  by  Eugene 

Davenport 

178 —  Crisis  in  the  foot  and  mouth  disease  situa- 

tion by  a committee  of  the  Experiment 
Station 

179 —  Four  aphids  injurious  to  the  apvle  by  B.  S, 

Pickett 

180—  San  Jose  Scale  by  P.  A.  Glenn 

181—  How  not  to  treat  Illinois  soils  by  C.  G* 

Hopkins 


182—  Fertilizer  problem  from  the  vegetable  grower1 

standpoint  by  C.  E.  Durst 

183 —  Bibliography  of  recent  literature  coneeming 

plant-disease  prevention  by  C.  C.  Rees 
and  Wallace  Macfarlane 
and 

Bibliography  of  non-p&rasitic  diseases  of 
plants  by  C.  W.  Lantz 

184 —  Prairie  spirit  in  landscape  gardening  by 

Wilhelm  Miller 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 

URBANA,  JANUARY  1912 
CIRCULAR  NO.  155 


PLANT  FOOD  IN  RELATION  TO  SOIL  FERTILITY" 

By  Cyril  G.  Hopkins 

I take  it  that  the  only  justification  for  me  to  review  the  sub- 
ject of  plant  food  in  relation  to  soil  fertility  or  crop  production  is 
the  fact  that  recent  publications  from  the  federal  Bureau  of  Soils 
have  strongly  affirmed  that  there  is  no  necessity  of  applying 
plant  food  in  the  restoration  and  maintenance  of  soil  fertility. 
Two  principal  questions  are  raised:  First,  Does  p’ant  food  ap- 

plied increase  crop  yields  in  harmony  with  recognized  soil  de- 
ficiencies and  crop  requirements?  Second  will  the  rotation  of 
crops  maintain  the  productive  power  of  the  soil  by  avoiding  in- 
jury from  possible  toxic  excreta  from  plant  roots?  I shall  try  to 
present  facts  and  data  and  exact  quotations  rather  than  my  own 
opinions  concerning  these  questions  of  such  fundamental  im- 
portance in  relation  to  systems  of  permanent  agriculture. 

In  1804  DeSaussure,  the  French  scientist,  first  gave  to  the 
world  a correct  and  almost  complete  statement  concerning  the 
sources  of  the  food  of  plants,  including  not  only  the  confirma- 
tion of  Senebier’s  discovery  of  the  fixation  of  carbon  in  the  for- 

*An  address  read  before  the  Botanical  Society  of  America  and  the 
Botanical  Section  of  the  American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of 
Science,  in  joint  session,  at  Washington,  December  27,  1911. 


2 


mation  of  carbohydrates,  but  also  the  evidence  of  plant  require- 
ments for  the  essential  mineral  elements  secured  from  the  soil. 

Sir  Humphrey  Davy  and  Baron  von  Liebig  did  much  to  pop- 
ularize this  information  during  the  following  half  century;  and 
they  were  followed  by  Lawes  and  Gilbert,  whose  extensive  and 
long-continued  investigations  furnished  the  needed  proof  that 
the  soil  must  furnish  nitrogen  as  well  as  the  mineral  elements; 
and  finally,  only  twenty-five  years  ago,  Hellriegel  discovered  the 
symbiotic  relationship  between  legumes  and  bacteria  which  gives 
access  to  the  inexhaustible  supply  of  atmospheric  nitrogen  for 
soil  enrichment. 

Briefly,  it  might  be  said  that  for  nearly  a century  the  world 
of  science  has  accepted  and  taught,  and  the  world  of  advanced 
agricultural  methods  has  practiced,  the  doctrine  that  soil  fertil- 
ity maintenance  and  soil  enrichment  require  the  restoration  or 
addition  of  plant  food,  including  particularly  phosphorus  and 
nitrogen,  which  are  most  likely  to  become  deficient  in  normal 
soils,  potassium  where  needed,  and  sometimes  lime  or  limestone, 
which  always  supplies  calcium,  and  magnesium  as  well  if  dol- 
omitic  limestone  be  used.  Of  the  other  five  essential  elements, 
carbon  and  oxygen  are  secured  from  the  carbon  dioxid  of  the 
air,  hydrogen  from  water,  and  iron  from  the  inexhaustible  sup- 
ply in  the  soil;  while  the  sulfur  brought  to  the  soil  in  rain  and 
otherwise  from  the  atmospheric  supply,  resulting  from  combus- 
tion and  decomposition  of  sulfur-bearing  materials,  supple- 
mented by  the  soil’s  supply  and  by  that  returned  in  crop  residues, 
appears  to  be  sufficient  to  meet  the  plant  requirements  and  the 
loss  by  leaching. 

After  nearly  a century  of  the  increasing  agricultural  practice 
of  this  doctrine  on  much  of  the  farm  land  of  Germany,  France, 
Belgium,  Holland,  Denmark,  and  the  British  Isles,  those  coun- 
tries have  approximately  doubled  their  average  acre-yields.  The 
ten-year  average  yield  of  wheat  in  the  United  States  is  14  bushels 
per  acre,  while  that  in  Europe  has  gone  up  to  29  bushels  in  Ger- 
many, to  33  bushels  in  Great  Britain,  and  to  more  than  40  bushels 
per  acre  in  Denmark.  The  annual  application  of  phosphorus 
even  to  the  soils  of  Italy  has  already  become  greater  than  the 
phosphorus  content  of  all  the  crops  removed.  The  exportation 
of  our  highest  grade  phosphate  rock  from  the  United  States  to 


Europe  now  exceeds  a million  tons  a year,  carrying  away  from 
our  own  country  twice  as  much  phosphorus  as  is  required  for 
the  annual  wheat  crops  of  all  the  states,  and  millions  of  acres  of 
farm  land  in  our  own  Eastern  States  have  already  been  agri- 
culturally abandoned,  because  of  depleted  fertility  and  reduced 
productive  power;  so  that  it  is  now  impossible  for  our  Congress- 
men to  enter  the  Capitol  of  the  United  States  from  any  direction 
without  passing  abandoned  farms. 

Ultimate  analysis  has  shown  that  the  most  common  loam 
soil  of  southern  Maryland,*  almost  adjoining  the  District  of 
Columbia,  contains  only  160  pounds  of  phosphorus,  1,000  pounds 
of  calcium,  and  about  900  pounds  of  nitrogen  in  two  million 
pounds  of  surface  soil,  corresponding  approximately  to  an  acre 
of  land  6 2/3  inches  deep.  The  clover  crops  harvested  from  the 
rich  garden  soil  at  Rothamsted  in  eight  consecutive  years  re- 
moved more  phosphorus  and  calcium  from  the  soil  than  the 
total  amounts  contained  in  the  plowed  soil  of  this  wornout 
Maryland  land,  whose  total  nitrogen  content  is  also  less  than 
would  be  required  for  seven  such  crops  of  corn  as  we  harvest  on 
good  land  in  the  central  west,  which,  however,  contains  ten 
times  as  much  of  these  plant  foods  as  the  depleted  Maryland  soil. 

During  the  last  ten  years  our  population  increased  21  percent, 
the  same  as  during  the  preceding  decade,  while  the  acreage  of 
farm  lands  increased  less  than  5 percent,  and  the  federal  govern- 
ment reportsf  all  future  possible  increase  in  farm  land  at  only  9 
percent  of  our  present  acreage. 

Average  crop  yields  for  four  '10-year  periods  are  now  re- 
ported by  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture.  A com- 
parison of  two  20-year  averages  shows  increased  acre-yields  of 
1 bushel  for  wheat  and  % bushel  for  rye,  while  the  yield  of  corn 
has  decreased  IV2  bushels  and  the  yield  of  potatoes  has  decreased 
7 bushels  per  acre,  by  20-year  averages.  These  crops  represent 
our  greatest  sources  of  human  food,  even  our  supply  of  meat  be- 
ing largely  dependent  upon  the  corn  crop.  Less  than  20-year 

‘See  “Leonardtown  loam”,  Bureau  of  Soils  Bulletin  54,  and 
“Field  Operations  of  the  Bureau  of  Soils”  in  Reports  for  1900  and  1901; 
or  see  pages  138  to  142  of  Hopkins’  “Soil  Fertility  and  Permanent  Agri- 
culture”, Ginn  & Company,  Boston. 

tSee  Circular  No.  38,  Office  of  the  Secretary,  United  States  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture. 


4 


averages  are  not  trustworthy  for  a consideration  of  any  small  in- 
crease or  decrease  in  yield  per  acre.  It  should  be  noted  that  dur- 
ing the  last  forty  years  vast  areas  of  virgin  wheat  land  have  been 
put  under  cultivation,  including  the  Dakotas,  which  now  produce 
more  wheat  than  all  the  states  east  of  the  Mississippi,  save  only 
Indiana  and  Illinois. 

A comparison  of  the  last  five  years  with  the  average  of  the 
five  years  ending  with  1900  shows  that  our  wheat  exports  de- 
creased during  the  decade  from  198  million  to  116  million 
bushels,  and  that  our  corn  exports  decreased  from  193  million  to 
57  million  bushels. 

Thus  we  have  fed  our  increasing  population  not  by  increas- 
ing our  acre-yields,  but  by  a slight  increase  in  the  acreage  of 
farm  land  and  by  a large  decrease  in  our  exportation  of  food 
stuffs;  and  the  fact  must  be  plain  that  before  another  decade 
shall  have  passed  we  shall  reach  the  practical  limit  of  our  relief 
in  both  of  these  directions. 

Indeed,  a most  common  subject  already  discussed  in  the 
press  and  investigated  by  national,  state  and  city  authorities  dur- 
ing the  last  three  or  four  years  is  the  high  cost  of  plain  living. 

With  these  facts  and  statistics  before  us,  let  us  consider  the 
actual  results  secured  from  field  and  laboratory  investigations  : 

Where  wheat  has  been  grown  every  year  since  1844  on 
Broadbalk  Field  at  Rothamsted,  England,  the  average  yield  for 
fifty-five  years  has  been  12.9  bushels  per  acre  on  unfertilized 
land,  35.5  bushels  where  heavy  annual  applications  of  farm 
manure  have  been  made,  and  37.1  bushels  per  acre  where  slightly 
less  plant  food  has  been  applied  in  commercial  form. 

Barley  grown  every  year  on  Hoos  Field  at  Rothamsted  has 
produced,  for  the  same  fifty-five  years,  an  average  yield  of  14.8 
bushels  on  unfertilized  land,  47.7  bushels  with  farm  manure,  and 
43.9  bushels  where  much  less  plant  food  was  applied  in  commer- 
cial form. 

Potatoes  grown  for  twenty-six  consecutive  years,  also  on 
Hoos  Field  at  Rothamsted,  produced,  as  an  average,  51  bushels 
per  acre  on  unfertilized  land,  178  bushels  where  farm  manure 
was  used  (reinforced  with  acid  phosphate  during  the  first  seven 
years),  and  203  bushels  where  plant  food  was  applied  in  commer- 
cial form.  The  first  year  of  this  investigation  the  unfertilized 


5 


land  produced  144  bushels,  land  receiving  farm  manure  alone 
produced  159  bushels,  and  land  fertilized  with  commercial  plant 
food  produced  328  bushels  per  acre. 

Director  A.  D.  Hall,  of  the  Rothamsted  Experiment  Station, 
makes  the  following  statement  on  pages  95  and  96  of  his  book  on 
“The  Rothamsted  Experiments”: 

“On  the  plots  receiving  farmyard  manure,  and  even  on  those  re- 
ceiving only  a complete  artificial  manure,  the  crop  was  maintained  in 
favorable  seasons.  No  falling-off  was  observed  which  could  be  attrib- 
uted to  the  land  having  become  ‘sick’  through  the  continuous  growth 
of  the  same  crop,  or  through  the  accumulation  of  disease  in  the  soil.” 

In  commenting  upon  these  same  experiments,  Milton  Whit- 
ney, Chief  of  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Soils,  makes  the  fol- 
lowing statement  in  Farmers’  Bulletin  No.  257,  page  14  : 

“One  of  the  most  interesting  instances  going  to  show  that  toxic  sub- 
stances are  formed  and  that  what  is  poisonous  to  one  crop  is  not  neces- 
sarily poisonous  or  injurious  to  another  is  a series  of  experiments 
of  Lawes  and  Gilbert—  the  growing  of  potatoes  for  about  fifteen  years 
on  the  same  field.  At  the  end  of  this  perioc^  they  got  the  soil  into  a 
condition  in  which  it  would  not  grow  potatoes  at  all.  The  soil  was  ex- 
hausted, and  under  the  older  ideas  it  was  necessarily  deficient  in  some 
plant  food.  It  seems  strange  that,  under  our  old  ideas  of  soil  fertility, 
if  the  soil  became  exhausted  for  potatoes,  it  should  grow  any  other  crop, 
because  the  usual  analysis  shows  the  same  constituents  present  in  all 
of  our  plants,  not  in  the  same  proportion,  but  all  are  present  and  all 
necessary,  so  far  as  we  know.  This  field  was  planted  in  barley,  and  on 
this  experimental  plot  that  had  ceased  to  grow  potatoes  they  got  75 
bushels  of  barley.” 

If,  now,  we  turn  to  the  actual  records  of  the  Rothamsted  ex- 
periments we  find  that  the  first  crop  of  barley  grown  after 
twenty-six  years-  of  potatoes*  was  33.2  bushels  per  acre  on  unfer- 
tilized land,  only  24.8  bushels  where  minerals  alone  had  been 
used  and  the  soil  depleted  of  nitrogen  by  the  potato  crops,  67 
bushels  per  acre  where  minerals  and  nitrogen  had  been  used,  and 
72.4  bushels  where  farm  manure  had  been  applied  for  twenty-six 
years.  We  also  find,  in  strict  harmony  with  Director  Half's  state- 
ment, that  the  largest  average  yield  of  potatoes  from  the  farm 
manure  plots  (3  and  4),  either  for  one  year  or  for  five  years,  was 
secured  after  potatoes  had  been  grown  on  the  same  land  for  more 
than  fifteen  years. 

On  permanent  meadow  land  at  Rothamsted,  the  average 


6 


yield  of  hay  for  fifty  years  was  1%  tons  per  acre  on  unfertilized 
land',  and  more  than  4 tons  per  acre  on  land  heavily  fertilized 
with  commercial  plant  food.  During  the  last  ten  years  of  this 
fifty-year  period  the  unfertilized  land  has  produced  an  average 
yield  of  1863  pounds  of  hay,  while  the  fertilized  land  has  pro- 
duced 8490  pounds  per  acre. 

On  Barn  Field  at  Rothamsted,  mangels  were  grown  for  thirty 
years.  The  average  yield  per  acre  was  4%  tons  on  unfertilized 
land,  19%  tons  where  farm  manure  hac(  been  applied,  and  29  tons 
per  acre  where  the  farm  manure  had  been  reinforced  with  nitro- 
gen and  phosphorus  in  commercial  form. 

In  1902  the  University  of  Ilinois  began  a series  of  experi- 
ments on  the  common  corn-belt  prairie  land  in  McLean  county, 
on  a field  which  had  grown  no  wheat  for  thirty-two  years.  We 
first  grew  wheat  in  1905.  Four  plots  not  receiving  phosphorus 
produced  respectively,  28.8  bushels,  30.5  bushels,  33.2  bushels  and 
29.5  bushels  of  wheat  per  acre;  while  four  other  plots  which  dif- 
fered from  these  only  by  the  addition  of  phosphorus,  at  the  rate 
of  25  pounds  of  that  element  in  200  pounds  of  steamed  bone  meal 
per  acre  per  annum,  produced  39.2  bushels,  50.9  bushels,  37.8 
bushels,  and  51.9  bushels,  respectively  per  acre.  Six  year  later 
wheat  was  again  grown  on  this  land,  when  the  four  plots  not  re- 
ceiving phosphorus  produced,  respectively,  22.5  bushels,  25.6 
bushels,  21.7  bushels,  27.3  bushels,  per  acre,  and  the  other  four 
plots,  which  differ  from  these  in  treatment  only  by  the  phos- 
phorus applied  during  the  ten  years,  produced  57.6  bushels,  60.2 
bushels,  54.0  bushels,  and  60.4  bushels,  respectively,  of  wheat  per 
acre,  this  being  the  second  crop  of  wheat  grown  on  this  land  in 
forty  years. 

This  most  common  prairie  land  of  the  Illinois  corn  belt  con- 
tains 600  pounds  of  phosphorus  and  18,000  pounds  of  potassium 
per  million  of  surface  soil,  while  one  million  pounds  of  the  sub- 
soil contain  450  pounds  of  phosphorus  and  27,000  pounds  of 
potassium.  This  is  the  type  of  soil  on  which,  as  an  average  of 
four  different  tests  each  year  under  four  different  conditions  of 
soil  treatment,  the  addition  of  phosphorus  produced  an  increase 
in  yield  per  acre  of  9.6  bushels  of  corn  in  1902,  of  17.8  bushels 
of  corn  in  1903,  of  14.8  bushels  of  oats  in  1904,  of  14.4  bushels  of 
wheat  in  1905,  of  1.46  tons  of  clover*  in  1906,  of  18.8  bushels  of 

* Average  of  two  tests  (See  Illinois  Soil  Report  No.  2,  pages  17,  39). 


7 


corn  in  1907,  of  17.3  bushels  of  corn  in  1908,  of  15.2  bushels  of 
oats  in  1909,  of  2.56  tons  of  clover*  in  1910,  and  an  average  in- 
crease of  33.8  bushels  of  wheat  per  acre  in  1911. 

As  an  average  of  four  similar  tests  during  the  ten  years,  ap- 
plications of  potassium  (costing  the  same  as  phosphorus)  in- 
creased the  yield  of  corn  by  3.1  bushels,  decreased  the  yield  of 
oats  by  2.3  bushels,  decreased  the  yield  of  clover  by  70  pounds  per 
acre,  and  increased  the  yield  of  wheat  by  .1  bushel  per  acre, 
these  being  the  general  average  results  from  the  four  years  of 
corn  and  from  two  years  each  of  oats,  clover,  and  wheat. 

If  now  we  turn  to  the  extensive  peaty  swamp  soil  of  northern 
and  north-central  Illinois,  we  find  by  analysis  that  it  contains  in 
one  million  pounds  of  the  surface  soil  1960  pounds  of  phosphorus 
and  2930  pounds  of  potassium,  or  more  than  three  times  as  much 
phosphorus  and  less  than  one-sixth  as  much  potassium  as  the 
common  prairie.  We  also  find  that,  as  an  average  of  triplicate 
tests  each  year,  potassium  increased  the  yield  of  corn  per  acre  by 
20.7  bushels  in  1902,  by  23.5  bushels  in  1903,  by  29.0  bushels  in 

1904,  and  by  36.8  bushels  in  1905;  while  the  addition  of  phos- 
phorus produced  a decrease  of  .1  bushel  in  1902,  and  an  increase 
of  .9  bushel  in  1903,  of  3.9  bushelsf  in  1904,  and  of  .3  bushel  in 

1905. 

As  an  average  of  the  results  from  twenty  plots  of  unfertilized 
land  in  the  Pennsylvania  rotation  experiments  with  corn,  oats, 
wheat,  and  hay  (clover  and  timothy  mixed),  the  crop  values  in 
two  consecutive  12-year  periods  decreased  by  26  percent;  while, 
as  an  average  of  the  twenty-four  years,  the  crop  values  were  in- 
creased 62  percent  by  farm  manure  and  65  percent  with  commer- 
cial plant  food,  as  compared  with  the  results  from  unfertilized 
land. 

The  records  from  the  Agdell  rotation  field  at  Rothamsted 
show  that  as  an  average  of  the  turnips,  barley,  clover  (or  beans), 
and  wheat  the  yields  decreased  on  unfertilized  land  by  42  per- 
cent measured  by  the  results  from  two  consecutive  32-year 
periods ; and,  if  we  span  a 60-year  period,  we  find  that  the  yield 
of  turnips  on  unfertilized  land  was  10  tons  per  acre  in  1848  and 
less  than  % ton  in  1908;  that  the  barley  yielded  46.5  bushels  in 

'Average  of  two  tests  (See  Illinois  Soil  Report  No.  2,  pages  17,  39). 
\ -{-Irregular  insect  injury  in  1904  (See  Illinois  Bulletin  123,  pages 
251,  252). 


8 


1849  and  only  10  bushels  per  acre  in  1909;  the  clover  produced 

2.8  tons  in  1850  and  less  than  1 ton  per  acre  in  1910;  while  the 
wheat  following  clover  produced  29.7  bushels  in  1851  and  24.5 
bushels  in  1911. 

The  application  of  plant  food  (for. the  turnip  crop  only)  in 
the  same  rotation  over  a period  of  sixty-four  years  increased  the 
average  yield  of  turnips  from  1%  tons  to  17%  tons  per  acre,  in- 
creased the  yield  of  the  barley  following  from  24.4  to  38.5  bushels, 
then  increased  the  average  yield  of  legumes  from  1945  pounds  to 
4413,  and  increased  the  yield  of  wheat  after  legumes  from  25  to 

34.8  bushels,  as  compared  with  the  unfertilized  land. 

If,  again,  we  span  the  sixty  years,  we  find  that  on  the  ferti- 
lized land  the  yield  of  turnips  was  12%  tons  in  1848  and  17%  tons 
in  1908;  that  barley  produced  35.9  bushels  in  J 849  and  33.4  bush- 
els in  1909;  that  clover  produced  3%  tons  in  1850  and  4%  tons 
in  1910;  while  wheat  yielded  30.3  bushels  in  1851  and  38  bushels 
per  acre  in  1911. 

Thus,  the  records  show  that  during  the  last  four  years,  fol- 
lowing a sixty-year  period,  the  plant  food  applied  has  increased 
the  yield  of  wheat  by  55  percent,  increased  the  barley  by  234  per- 
cent, and  the  clover  by  340  percent;  while  the  yield  of  turnips 
on  the  fertilized  land  was  49  times  as  great  as  on  the  unfertilized 
land. 

With  these  facts  in  mind  we  may  well  consider  the  following 
statements  from  Whitney  in  Farmers’  Bulletin  257: 

“Apparently,  these  small  amounts  of  fertilizers  we  add  to  the  soil 
have  their  effect  upon  these  toxic  substances  and  render  the  soil  sweet 
and  more  healthful  for  growing  plants.  We  believe  it  is  through  this 
means  that  our  fertilizers  act  rather  than  through  the  supplying  of  food 
to  the  plant.”  (Page  20.) 

“There  is  another  way  in  which  the  fertility  of  the  soil  can  be  main- 
tained; viz.,  by  arranging  a system  of  rotation  and  growing  each  year  a 
crop  that  is  not  injured  by  the  excreta  of  the  preceding  crop;  then  when 
the  time  comes  around  for  the  first  crop  to  be  planted  again  the  soil  has 
had  ample  time  to  dispose  of  the  sewerage  resulting  from  the  growth  of 

the  plant  two  or  three  years  before Barley  will  follow  potatoes 

in  the  Rothamsted  experiments  after  the  potatoes  have  grown  so  long 
that  the  soil  will  not  produce  potatoes.  The  barley  grows  unaffected  by 
the  excreta  of  potatoes,  another  crop  follows  the  barley,  and  the  soil  is 
then  in  condition  to  grow  potatoes  again. 


9 


“In  other  experiments  of  Lawes  and  Gilbert  they  have  maintained 
for  fifty  years  a yield  of  about  30  bushels  of  wheat  continuously  on  the 
same  soil  where  a. complete  fertilizer  has  been  used.  They  have  seen 
their  yield  go  down  where  wheat  followed  wheat  without  fertilizer  for 
fifty  years  in  succession  from  30  bushels  to  12  bushels,  which  is  what 
they  are  now  getting  annually  from  their  unfertilized  wheat  plot.  With 
a rotation  of  crops  without  fertilizers  they  have  also  maintained  their 
yield  for  fifty  years  at  30  bushels,  so  that  the  effect  of  rotation  has  in 
such  case  been  identical  with  that  of  fertilization.”  (Pages  21,  22.) 

If  we  turn  to  the  Rothamsted  data,  we  find  the  first  recorded 
yield  of  wheat  on  the  unfertilized  plot  on  Broadbalk  Field  was  not 
30  bushels,  but  ony  15  bushels ; that  the  average  of  the  first  eight 
years  was  17.4  bushels;  that  the  best  fertilized  plot  on  the  same 
field  has  averaged  not  30  bushels,  but  37.1  bushels  for  fifty-five 
years;  that,  as  stated  above,  the  wheat  grown  in  rotation,  fol- 
lowing a leguminous  crop,  has  averaged  not  30  bushels,  but  25 
bushels  on  unfertilized  land,  and  34.8  bushels  where  fertilizers 
were  applied  for  turnips  three  years  before. 

The  following  pertinent  quotations  are  from  Whitney  and 
Cameron  in  Bureau  of  Soils  Bulletin  22 : 

“In  England  and  Scotland  it  is  customary  to  make  an  allowance  to 
tenants  giving  up  their  farms  for  the  unused  fertilizers  applied  in  pre- 
vious seasons.  The  basis  of  this  is  usually  taken  at  30  to  50  percent  for 
the  first  year,  and  at  10  to  20  percent  for  the  second  year  after  applica- 
tion; but,  in  the  experience  of  this  Bureau  there  is  no  such  apparent 
continuous  effect  of  fertilizers  on  the  chemical  constitution  of  the  soil.” 
(Page  59.) 

“It  appears  further  that  practically  all  soils  contain  sufficient  plant 
food  for  good  crop  yield;  that  this  supply  will  be  indefinitely  main- 
tained.” (Page  64.) 

In  Bureau  of  Soils  Bulletin  55,  by  Whitney,  entitled  “Soils  of 
the  United  States”,  issued  in  1909,  we  find  under  the  heading 
“Permanency  of  Soil  Fertility  as  a National  Asset”,  the  following 
summarized  statements  : 

“The  soil  is  the  one  indestructible,  immutable  asset  that  the  na- 
tion possesses.  It  is  the  one  resource  that  cannot  be  exhausted;  that 
cannot  be  used  up.”  (Page  66.) 

“From  the  modern  conception  of  the  nature  and  purpose  of  the  soil 
it  is  evident  that  it  cannot  wear  out,  that  so  far  as  the  mineral  food  is 
concerned  it  will  continue  automatically  to  supply  adequate  quantities 
of  the  mineral  plant  food  for  crops.”  (Page  79.) 

“As  a national  asset  the  soil  is  safe  as  a means  of  feeding  mankind 
for  untold  ages  to  come.”  (Page  80.) 


10 


As  stated  in  the  beginning,  I have  not  planned  to  discuss  the 
subject  of  plant  food  in  relation  to  soil  fertility;  but  I felt  it  a 
duty  as  well  as  an  honor  to  be  permitted  to  accept  a place  on  your 
program;  and  I have  placed  before  you  some  most  important  and 
trustworthy  data  bearing  upon  the  question.  I have  presented 
some  statistics  for  consideration  in  connection  with  the  gravest 
problem  which  now  confronts  America;  namely,  the  problem  of 
restoring  American  soil  and  of  maintaining  American  prosperity. 
I have  quoted  accurately  and  fairly  from  the  teachings  of  Whit- 
ney and  Cameron;  and  I also  submit  for  your  information  the  fol- 
lowing quotation  from  Director  A.  D.  Hall,  of  Rothamsted  : 

“I  cannot  agree  with  Professor  Whitney’s  reading  of  the  results  on 
the  Agdell  field  in  the  least.  The  figures  he  quotes  for  wheat  are  hardly 
justifiable  as  approximations,  and  are  in  spirit  contrary  to  the  general 

tenor  of  the  particular  experiment In  my  opinion  the  results  on 

the  Agdell  rotation  field  are  directly  contrary  to  Professor  Whitney’s 
idea  that  rotation  can  do  the  work  of  fertilizers.”  (From  Report  of  the 
Committee  of  Seven,  appointed  by  the  Association  of  Official  Agricul- 
tural Chemists  “to  consider  in  detail  the  questions  raised”,  published  in 
full  in  Circular  123  of  the  University  of  Illinois  Agricultural  Experi- 
ment Station.) 

A thousand  additional  proofs  of  the  practical  value  and  of 
the  evident  necessity  of  supplying  plant  food  in  systems  of  per- 
manent agriculture  could  easily  be  cited. 

All  long-continued  investigations  and,  likewise,  all  practical 
agricultural  experience  show  that  great  reduction  in  crop  yields 
ultimately  occurs  unless  plant  food  is  restored  to  the  soil;  and, 
as  a rule,  the  chemical  composition  of  normal  soil  is  an  exceed- 
ingly valuable  guide  in  determining  the  kind  of  material  which 
should  be  supplied  in  practical  systems  of  soil  enrichment  and 
preservation. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

Agricultural  Experiment  Station 

URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  FEBRUARY,  1912 

CIRCULAR  NO.  156 

RICE  BLIGHT 
By  John  S.  Collier 


Rice  field  in  Arkansas,  1911.  This  field  had  an  average  yield 
of  76.2  bushels  per  acre.  1500  pounds  per  acre  of  limestone  was 
added.  This  was  aerated  three  weeks  at  the  time  the  head  was 
forming  in  the  “boot”. 


This  publication  is  preliminary  to  a doctor’s  thesis  which 
is  under  preparation  in  the  graduate  school  of  the  University 
of  Illinois,  It  is  issued  in  response  to  a considerable  request 
for  early  data. 

E.  Davenport, 

Director. 


RICE  BLIGHT 


By  John  S.  Collier 
Introduction 

The  condition  called  blight,  or  straight  head , is  found  to  a 
greater  or  less  extent  in  all  rice  growing  regions.  It  is  esti- 
mated that  at  least  twenty  percent  of  the  rice  in  the  United  States 
is  blighted  annually. 

A careful  estimate  of  the  amount  of  blight  in  the  rice  region 
of  Arkansas,  where  all  these  experiments  have  been  carried  on, 
was  made  in  1910  and  1911,  and  it  was  found  that  out  of  8000 
acres  of  rice  the  crop  was  injured  to  the  extent  of  at  least  12  to 
15  percent. 

In  a blighted  condition  the  heads  do  not  fill  and  hence  remain 
straight  (Fig.  1)  and  green,  while  the  well  filled  heads  droop  from 
the  weight  of  the  grain  (Fig.  2).  Blight  occurs  in  both  Hon- 
duras and  Japan  rices,  more  extensively,  however,  in  Honduras. 
Many  fields  were  noticed  where  the  damage  was  so  great  that 
the  rice  was  not  harvested. 


Fig.  1— Blighted  Rice.  The  Water  Was  On  This  For  Twelve  Weeks 
Averaging  Three  Inches  Deep.  Notice  the  Straight  Posi- 
tion of  the  Heads  As  Compared  With  Fig.  2. 


4 


Fiq,.  2— Unblighted  Rice.  This  Was  Aerated  Three  Weeks.  Observe 
That  the  Heads  Droop  From  The  Weight  of  The  Grain. 

Blight  is  not  the  so-called  “white  blast”,  caused  by  the  larvae  of 
a moth  which  bores  into  the  stem,  nor  should  it  be  confused  with 
“rotten  neck”,  a fungous  disease  which  attacks  the  plants  and 
causes  the  stem  to  break  just  below  the  head.  Both  of  these 
diseases  are  entirely  different  and  their  causes  are  well  known. 
But  very  little  “rotten  neck”  has  been  found  in  the  rice  on  Grand 
Prairie,  Arkansas,  where  these  experiments  were  conducted. 

The  following  experiments  were  undertaken  to  determine,  if 
possible,  the  cause  of  blight.  The  circular  here  presented  is  only 
a preliminary  statement,  hence  much  data  is  not  included.  In  a 
later  publication  the  entire  data  and  the  results  accomplished, 
including  experiments  with  fertilizers,  will  be  given.  In  a previ- 
ous publication  (1910)*  it  was  shown  that  blight  is  neither  a bac- 
terial nor  a fungous  disease. 

During  the  season  of  1911  the  conclusions  of  1910  were  veri- 
fied, in  which  it  was  stated:  “It  seems  possible  that  blight  may  be 
caused  by  improper  aeration  of  the  soil.” 

In  this  circular  it  is  shown  that  the  cause  of  blight  is  a purely 
physiological  one;  and  the  conditions  under  which  blight  occurs 

♦Report  of  Investigations  Concerning  Rice,  by  John  S.  Collier  to  the  Rice  Growers’  Associa- 
tion of  Arkansas.  Copies  may  be  had  of  J.  A.  Kenney.  Secretary  of  the  Rice  Growers’ Associa- 
tion, Stuttgart,  Arkansas. 


5 


and  the  manner  of  conducting  the  experiments  are  described,  with 
suggestions  of  available  methods  by  which  the  disease  may  be 
controlled. 

Plots.  Depth  of  Water 

In  1910  and  1911  two  hundred  plots,  each  twenty-five  feet  by 
twenty-five  feet,  were  laid  out  in  a number  of  rice  fields.  Some 
were  made  by  setting  twenty-four-inch  gully  tin  twelve  inches  in 
the  ground,  thus  leaving  twelve  inches  above  the  level  of  the  soil 
(Figs.  3 and  4),  while  others  were  staked  out  in  lands  where  the 
depth  of  water  could  be  controlled.  By  this  means  different 
depths  of  water  could  be  maintained  with  comparative  accuracy 
for  any  desired  length  of  time.  It  was  found  by  checking  up 
these  experiments  four  times  a week  that  a relatively  uniform 
depth  of  water  was  maintained  in  each  plot.  The  water  was 
turned  on  about  June  14,  and  drained  off  about  August  28 
each  year  for  harvest. 


Fig.  3— Shows  a Plot  Surrounded  by  Gully  Tin.  The  Water  Here 
is  From  Three  to  Five  Inches  Deep. 


6 


Thirty  plots  were  lost  by  over- flooding  or  drainage,  and 
therefore  are  not  included  in  this  data.  The  heads  of  the  rice  of 
each  plot  were  cut,  weighed  and  compared  with  those  of  a plot  the 
same  size  selected  from  the  field  at  large,  representing  the  aver- 
age condition  of  the  field.  This  gave  fairly  accurate  data  for 
comparison. 

Relation  of  Air  Content  of  Soil  and  Depth  of 

Water  to  Blight 

The  percent  of  air  in  the  soil  in  this  region  gives  some  idea 
as  to  its  physical  nature  and  its  value  to  rice  growing.  In  the 
following  table  the  amount  of  water  in  the  soil  was  de- 
termined just  before  flooding.  The  maximum  amount  of 
air  in  the  soil  was  found  to  be  on  an  average  52.8  per- 
cent. Then  the  amount  of  air  in  the  soil  was  found  after  the  water 
had  been  on  one,  two,  three,  four,  and  five  days  respectively, 
and  once  a week  thereafter.  Since  the  air  at  first  seemed  to  be 
trapped  in  the  soil  by  the  sudden  covering  of  the  soil  by  the 


Fig.  4— Shows  a Plot  Surrounded  by  Gully  Tin.  The  Height  of  the  Rice 
Compared  With  a Meter  Stick  (Nearly  40  Inches)  and 
the  Stooling. 


7 


water,  any  small  degree  of  rise  in  temperature  would  cause  a de- 
crease in  the  air  content  of  the  soil.  The  air  was  analyzed  each 
time  for  the  different  gases. 

The  term  “aerated”,  as  used  in  this  circular,  means  draining 
off  the  water  and  letting  the  soil  dry  so  that  the  air  can  get  thru 
it  to  the  roots. 

In  the  following  table  the  terms  “excellent”,  “good”,  “fair”, 
and  “poor”  are  used  with  reference  to  percentage  of  air  in  the 
soil. 


Excellent 45  — 52.8  percent 

Good 35  — 45  percent 

Fair 25  — 35  percent 

Poor 15  — 25  percent 


TABLE  1.— Depth  of  Water  Had  no  Relation  to  Blight.  Eyen 
Tho  the  Soil  was  in  Poor  Physical  Condition,  If  Prop- 
erly Aerated  the  Rice  Yielded  Fairly  Well 


Depth  of 
water, 
inches 

Number 
of  plots 

Condition  of 
soil  based  on 
amount  of  air 
at  time  of 
seeding 

Blighted, 

percent 

Un- 

blighted, 

percent 

Injured 
by  rice 
maggots, 
percent 

Aerated, 

weeks 

Group  1 

1 

10 

Excellent 

2 

98 

0 

3 

2 

10 

1 Fair 

46 

34 

20 

0 

3 

10 

Fair 

61 

39 

0 

0 

6 

10 

Poor 

95 

5 

0 

0 

Group  2 

1 

10 

Poor 

8 

92 

0 

3 

2 

10 

Fair 

60 

34 

6 

0 

4 

10 

Good 

80 

12 

8 

0 

6 

10 

Excellent 

0 

95 

5 

3 

Group  3 


1 

10 

Good 

15 

85 

0 

3 

2 

10 

Excellent 

80 

16 

4 

0 

4 

10 

Good 

25 

74 

0 

3 

6 

10 

Excellent 

70 

30 

0 

0 

I 

8 


Physical  Condition  of  the  Soil 

To  determine  the  relation  of  the  physical  condition  of  the 
soil  to  blight,  thirty  of  fifty  plots  were  spaded  up  when  the 
soil  was  very  wet,  and  then  raked  with  a garden  rake.  The  other 
twenty  plots  were  worked  when  sufficiently  dry.  To  these  latter 
limestone  was  added  at  the  rate  of  1500  pounds  per  acre. 


Fig.  5— Effect  of  Correcting  Acidity,  Proper  Aeration,  and  Fertilizer. 

Japan  Rice. 


Table  2 —Effect  of  Working  the  Soil  When  too  Wet  and  of  Liming 


No.  of 
plots 

Physical 

condition 

Weeks 
water  was 
on 

Weeks 

aerated 

Result 

10 

Worked 

wet 

12 

0 

Blight  42  percent 

10 

Worked 

wet 

9 

3 

Scarcely  any  blight 

10 

Limed 

12 

0 

Blight  *70  percent 

10 

10 

Worked 

wet 

Limed 

11 

(stagnant) 

8 

0 

Twice,  2 

Blight  80-90  percent 

weeks  each 
time 

Excellent  crop,  No.  1 rice 

9 


Acid  Soil 

In  the  report  previously  cited  (1910)  it  was  shown  that  of  the 
samples  of  soil  taken  from  the  203  plots,  representing  23  different 
farms,  91  samples  showed  strong  acid  reaction  July  19  and  20,  and 
from  this  time  on  until  the  water  was  turned  off  before  harvest- 
ing. In  79  cases  out  of  91  where  there  was  this  strong  acid 
reaction,  blight  was  found  in  more  or  less  abundance.  The  re- 
maining 12  showed  heads  partially  filled  out.  Of  the  102  places 
which  gave  no  acid  reaction,  92  had  no  trace  of  blighted  heads. 
The  following  year  (1911)  50  plots  were  taken  which  showed 
strong  acid  reaction  July  15.  These  were  checked  as  nearly 
as  possible  in  groups  of  five. 


Table  3.— Effect  of  Acid  Soil  on  Blight 


Number 
of  plots 

Acid 

Weeks 

aerated 

Weeks 
water 
was  on 

Bu.  of  1 
rice  per 
acre 

Result 

5 

Yes 

0 

12 

14.2 

Heavily  blighted 

5 

No 

4 

8 

52.0 

Scarcely  any  blight 

5 

Yes 

4 

8 

44.0 

Scarcely  any  blight 

5 

Yes 

2 

10 

38.0 

Some  blight 

5 

No 

0 

12 

16.0 

Heavily  blighted 

5 

No 

1 

11 

40.0 

Some  blight 

5 

Yes 

4 

6 

55.0 

No  blight 

Fig.  6— A.  Blighted  Rice.  B.  Unblighted.  “Lands”  About  SixFeet  Apart. 


10 


The  other  fifteen  plots  were  similar  in  result  to  the  above. 
When  the  soil,  even  tho  aerated,  was  very  acid  there  was  not  the 
yield  in  the  field  at  large  that  there  was  when  the  acidity  had  been 
corrected  by  the  addition  of  limestone. 


Analyses  of  Soil  and  Water 

Some  observers  have  found  that  in  irrigated  regions  there 
is  a rise  of  black  alkali  to  such  a degree  as  to  injure  the 
stalk  and  cause  it  to  turn  black.  In  order  to  determine  whether 
this  condition  affected  the  rice,  the  water  that  was  pumped  on 
the  soil  was  analyzed  just  as  it  came  from  the  wells  and  also  after 
it  had  remained  on  the  soil  for  periods  of  two  and  four  weeks  re- 
spectively. Since  fresh  water  is  added  about  the  third  or  fourth 
week,  it  is  about  this  time  that  the  maximum  concentration  of 
salts  in  the  water,  due  to  evaporation,  is  reached. 


Analysis  of  water  when  first  pumped  from  wells 


Total  solids 

Loss  on  gentle  ignition. . . 

Silica 

Iron  and  aluminum  oxids 

Calcium 

Magnesium 

Sodium  chlorid  (NaCI) 
Potassium  chlorid  (KC1) 

Total  chlorin 

Sulfur 

Ammonia  nitrogen 

Organic  nitrogen 

Nitrite  nitrogen 

Nitrate  nitrogen 


361.00  per  million 

144.00  “ 

14.20  “ 

18.00  “ 

50.05  “ 

11.95  “ 

42.00  “ “ 

22.60  “ “ 

1.20  “ 

0.03  “ *• 

0.196  “ “ 

None 
Trace 


Analysis  of  water  after  it  has  been  on  the  soil  four  weeks 


Total  solids 446.00  per  million 

Loss  on  gentle  ignition 144.00  “ “ 

Silica ; 38.40  “ 

Iron  and  aluminum  oxids ..  43’00  “ 

Calcium 65.05  “ “ 

Magnesium 15.21  “ “ 

Sodium  chlorid  (NaCI)  \ % 49.00  “ “ 

Potassium  chlorid  (KOI)  i"  ’ ' 

Total  chlorin 23.10  “ “ 

Sulfur 1.20  “ “ 

Ammonia  nitrogen 0.03  “ “ 

Organic  nitrogen  0.195  “ 

Nitrite  nitrogen None 

Nitrate  nitrogen Trace 


11 


Fig.  7— A.  Blighted.  B.  Unblighted.  B.  Made  Nearly  80  Bu.  per  Acre 
1911,  altho  Badly  Blighted  (80  per  cent)  1910. 


Fig.  8— A.  Blighted.  B.  Unblighted. 


12 


The  analysis  of  the  second  week  is  practically  the  same  as 
that  of  the  fourth  week,  so  need  not  be  given  here. 

The  soil  was  taken  at  a depth  of  7 inches.  The  elements  in 
an  acre  of  soil  before  and  after  being  flooded,  in  terms  of  pounds, 
were  found  to  be  as  follows,  the  soil  on  an  acre  taken  to  a depth 
of  6|  inches  weighing  2,000,000  pounds: 


Analysis  of  soil  before  being  flooded 

Insoluble 

Organic  matter,  water,  etc. 

Silicon 

Iron 

Aluminum 

Phosphorus 

Manganese 

Calcium 

Magnesium 

Sodium 

Potassium 

Sulfur 


1,809,000  pounds 
79,600  “ 

1,480  “ 

15,500  “ 

36,680  “ 

610  “ 

700  “ 

680 

520 

2,400 

2,000  “ 

320  “ 


( 


Analysis  of  soil  after  being  Hooded  for  four  weeks 


Insoluble 1,772,200 

Organic  matter,  water,  etc 86,600 

Silicon 2,240 

Iron 24,600 

Aluminum 44,620 

Phosphorus 436 

Manganese 1,200 

Calcium. 800 

Magnesium 960 


pounds 

<< 

<< 

<( 

n 

u 


it 
1 1 


Sodium 2,800  “ 

Potassium  2,800  “ 

Sulfur 380  “ 

The  analysis  for  the  two  soils  is  a fair  average  of  many  analy- 
ses. The  differences  are  not  great  and  may  be  due  more  or  less  to 
sampling,  or  error  of  analysis. 


Effect  of  Moving  Water 

In  the  plots  for  experiment  with  moving  water,  the  water 
was  changed  as  indicated  in  the  following  table.  These  plots  were 
also  twenty- five  feet  square  and  some  were  surrounded  by  gully 
tin  as  in  the  work  on  depth  of  water.  The  water  was  let  in 
at  one  corner  of  the  plot,  thus  forcing  out  the  old  water  at  the 
opposite  corner.  In  this  series  of  experiments  the  water  was  kept 
on  the  soil  for  fourteen  weeks.  The  temperature  of  the  water 
when  it  first  comes  from  the  wells  is  about  66  degree  F.  (The 
average  depth  of  the  rice  wells  is  nearly  150  feet. ) After  the  water 
flows  in  the  canals  two  or  three  hours  the  temperature  rises  to 
70  degrees  F.  or  more.  * The  water  turned  on  the  plots  was  al- 
ways 74  degrees  or  over.  The  amount  of  blight  was  estimated  as 
mentioned  on  page  5. 


13 


Table  4.— Moving  Water  Decreases  the  Amount  of  Blight 


Depth  of 
water, 
inches 

Num- 
ber of 
plots 

Water 

was 

changed 

Blight- 
ed, per- 
cent 

Un- 

blighted, 

percent 

Condi- 
tion of 
soil,  See 
Table  1 

Injur- 
ed by 
other 
causes 

Group  1 

1 

20 

Each  week 

for  first  ten  weeks 

15 

85 

Fair 

0 

2 

20 

Every  2 weeks 

37 

60 

Good 

3 

4 

20 

Every  3 weeks 

40 

54 

Good 

6 

6 

20 

Every  4 weeks 

40 

60 

Good 

0 

Group  2 


1 

10 

Once  every  5 weeks 

35 

60 

Good 

5 

2 

10 

5 times  in  10  weeks 

25 

85 

Good 

0 

4 

10 

3 times  in  10  weeks 

36 

50 

Good 

14 

6 

10 

10  times  in  10  weeks 

35 

o2 

Good 

13 

Group  3 


1 

10 

Not  changed 

75 

25 

Good 

0 

2 

5 

8 times  in  first 

10  weeks 

26 

70 

Good 

4 

4 

10 

Not  changed 

81 

10 

Good 

9 

Sub-aeration 

Three  plots  twenty-five  feet  square  were  surrounded  by 
twenty-four-inch  gully  tin  set  fifteen  inches  deep  before  the  rice 
was  sown.  Six  pipes  one-half  inch  in  diameter  and  fifteen  feet 
long  running  parallel  and  three  feet  apart  were  laid  three  to  four 
inches  deep  in  the  soil.  These  had  several  one-eighth  inch  holes 
every  inch.  To  keep  out  the  fine  soil  they  were  covered  with 
cheese  cloth.  The  pipes  were  connected  at  each  end  with  solid  pipe 
which  had  another  piece  of  pipe  connected  to  it  and  which  stood  up 
out  of  the  water  about  twenty  inches.  This  had  an  air-tight  cap 
which  could  be  removed  whenever  it  was  necessary  to  force  air  into 
the  pipes  below.  These  pipes  were  tested  before  the  water  was 
turned  on  to  see  if  air  could  be  forced  thru  them.  This  was  done 
by  means  of  a large  force  pump  such  as  is  used  for  inflating  auto- 
mobile tires.  As  the  pipes  in  Group  2 became  clogged  with  soil 
and  had  to  be  removed,  the  water  was  off  this  group  for  nearly 
two  days. 


Table  5.— Result  of  Sub-aeration 


Depth  of 
water, 
inches 

Weeks 
water 
was  on 

Aeration 

Results 

Plot  1 

3 

10 

Air  was  pumped  in 
for  three  hours 
once  every  two  weeks 

About  30  percent 
blighted 

Check  1 

3 

6 

Aerated  four  weeks 

Scarcely  any  blight 

Check  2 

3 

10 

Not  aerated 

Badly  blighted, 
45  to  50  percent 

Plot  2 

3 

10 

Air  pumped  in  for 
three  hours  once 
each  week  for  ten 
weeks 

About  40  percent 
blighted 

Check  1 

3 

6 

Aerated  four  weeks 

Scarcely  any  blight 

Check  2 

3 

10 

Not  aerated 

Badly  blighted, 
55  to  60  percent 

Plot  3 

3 

10 

Air  pumped  for  one 
hour  four  times  a 
week  for  ten  weeks 

About  40  percent 
blighted 

Check  1 

3 

6 

Aerated  for  three 
weeks  the  first  time 
and  one  week  the 
second  time 

Excellent  yield 

Check  2 

3 

10 

Not  aerated 

Nearly  all  blighted 

Relation  of  Pore  Space  in  Soil  to  Blight 

A cubic  foot  of  soil  on  Grand  Prairie,  Arkansas,  has  about 
52.8  percent  pore  space  and  4 percent  organic  matter,  thus  indi- 
cating a fairly  good  physical  condition.  When  the  water  is 
turned  on  to  a depth  of  about  three  inches,  there  is  a sudden  fall 
(see  Chart  1)  during  the  first  two  or  three  days  in  the  amount 
of  soil  air  and  a gradual  decrease  until  the  sixth  or  seventh  week, 
when  the  soil  is  found  to  be  practically  devoid  of  air.  It  is  near 
this  time  that  the  rice  roots  are  found  to  become  abnormal.  If 
the  water  is  left  on  for  a longer  period,  the  percentage  of  blight 
may  increase  quite  rapidly.  This  is  shown  by  the  lower  part 
of  the  chart,  which  gives  the  summary  of  many  experiments. 
The  sudden  rise  of  the  line,  near  the  sixth  or  seventh  week,  indi- 
cates a corresponding  increase  of  blight. 

It  is  nearly  impossible  to  tile  the  land  in  this  region  because 
of  the  impervious  substratum  at  a depth  of  about  eight  or  ten  in- 


15 


ches.  Surface  drainage  is,  therefore,  the  only  practical  way  and 
can  be  accomplished  very  easily  by  a few  open  side  ditches. 

Effects  of  the  Addition  of  Mineral  Salts 

The  plots  in  the  following  experiments  were  twenty- five  feet 
by  twenty- five  feet  and  controlled  as  in  previous  experiments. 
The  plots  that  had  mineral  salts  put  on  them  in  1910  were  noticed 
and  checked,  so  far  as  the  same  plots  had  rice  on  in  1911,  to  see  the 
effect  the  second  season.  No  salts  were  added  to  these  in  1911. 
The  increase  with  the  use  of  fertilizers  each  season  will  be  given 
in  a later  publication.  On  some  of  the  plots  the  mineral  salts 
were  disced  into  the  soil  before  seeding,  while  on  others  they 
were  raked  in  by  means  of  a garden  rake.  The  water,  in  each 
case,  was  kept  at  an* average  depth  of  three  inches.  In  no  case 
was  it  found  that  mineral  salts  had  any  influence  on  blight. 
Other  mineral  salts  were  tried  singly  and  in  combination. 


%of  PORE  SPACE 

WEEKS 

1 

2. 

3 

4 

< 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

1 2. 

1 3 

1 4 

5 2,80 

4 7.5  2 

\ 

42.24 

\ 

36.96 

k 

3 1.68 

V 

\ 

26.40 

2 1.12 

13.84 

1 0.36 

5.28 

0.00 

To  of  BLIGHT 

lOO 

90 

ao 

70 

60 

50 

j 

±Q 

T 

2Q 

2D 

ID 

0 

3Art  1.  Uppfr  Half  Shows  Relation  between  Length  of  Flooding  and 
Air  Content  of  the  Soil.  Lower  Half  Shows  Relation  between 
Length  of  Flooding  and  percent  of  Blight. 


16 


Table  6.— Addition  of  Mineral  Salts 


Mineral  salt, 
ratio  per  acre. 

Aeration 

Weeks 
water  was 
on 

Result 

Group  1 

Plot  1 

NaCl  200  lb. 

0 

12 

Blighted 

Plot  2 

NaCl  200  lb. 

3 

9 

No  blight 

Check 

None 

0 

12 

Blighted 

Group  2 


Plot  1 

MgSCh  200  lb. 

0 

12 

Some  blight 

Plot  2 

MgSCh  200  lb. 

3 

9 

No  blight 

Check 

None 

3 

9 

Some  blight 

Group  3 


Plot  1 

Acid  phosphate 
2001b.  [2001b. 

0 

12 

Over  half  blighted 

Plot  2 

Acid  phosphate 

3 

9 

Good  yield 

Check 

None 

3 

9 

Scarcely  any  blight 

Group  4 


Plot  1 

K2SO4  100  lb. 

0 

12 

Quite  a little  blight 

Plot  2 

K2SO4  100  lb. 

3 

9 

Excellent  yield* 

Check 

None 

0 

12 

Three-fourths  blighted 

Group  5 


Plot  1 

NaNOs  100  lb. 

0 

12 

Good  stalk,  f blighted 

Plot  2 

NaNOs  100  lb. 

3 

9 

Fine  yield 

Check 

None 

0 

12 

Over  one-half  blighted 

* See  Fig.  5. 


Practical  Results  of  The  Experiments 

That  the  results  of  these  experiments  could  be  made  practical 
was  quite  evident  to  the  writer  in  1910,  when  several  lands  (a  land 
being  the  ground  between  two  levees)  were  placed  under  experi- 
ment and  gave  very  definite  results.  In  1911  the  results  were 
even  more  striking  (Figs.  7 and  8),  when,  under  practically  the 
same  condition  of  soil,  seed,  and  planting,  the  lands  under  experi- 
ment produced  a yield  of  from  65  to  70  bushels  per  acre,  while 
land  six  feet  away  had  70  to  80  percent  of  blight.  The  following 
table  gives  the  data  concerning  these  “lands.”  There  were  from 
three  to  eight  acres  in  each  “land.” 


Table  7.— Efect  of  Proper  Aeration 


Land 

number 

Water  three 
inches  deep 
was  on,  weeks 

Aerated, 

weeks 

Bushels 
per  acre 

Results 

1 

12 

0 

17.2 

75  percent  blighted 

2 

11 

1 

55.1 

15-20  percent  blighted 

3 

10 

2 

62.3 

Less  than  10  percent  blighted 

4 

9 

3 

74.2 

No  blight,  excellent  yield 

Three  groups  like  the  above  were  run  with  the  same  definite  results. 


17 


Fig.  9— A.  Blighted.  B.  Unblighted.  Notice  the  Arrows  Showing  the 
Direction  of  Blight  to  a Line.  Nothing  but  Gully  Tin  Sepa- 
rates the  Two  Plots.  B.  was  Areated  for  Three  Weeks. 

In  A.  the  Water  was  on  for  Twelve  Weeks  Continuously 
and  Averaged  Three  to  Four  Inches  Deep. 


Fig.  10— The  Water  Turned  on  When  the  Rice  is  About  Eight  Inches 

Tall. 


18 


Rice  Structure 


In  the  previous  report  mentioned,  it  was  stated  that  there 
was  no  difference  in  the  structure  of  the  blighted  and  unblighted 
rice  stalk.  More  recent  investigations  confirm  this.  In  the  case 
of  the  roots,  however,  there  are  some  distinctions  to  be  noted. 
After  the  sixth  week,  if  the  water  has  been  on  continuously  and 
not  moving,  there  is  a strong  indication  of  suberisation;  that  is, 
a thin  layer  of  cork  is  formed  in  the  outer  region  of  the  root,  that 
gives  a yellowish  color  to  the  root  in  comparison  to  the  normal 
root.  In  the  strongly  suberised  roots,  the  interior  structure  is 
broken  down  completely  after  the  eighth  week;  while  if  aerated 
about  the  fifth  week,  the  roots  seem  to  take  a new  hold  and  grow 
longer;  in  some  cases  the  stalk  will  put  out  new  roots.  The 
number  of  root  hairs  is  also  noticeably  decreased  after  the  fourth 
week.  About  the  time  the  head  was  being  formed  in  the  “boot”, 
where  the  soil  was  aerated  for  three  weeks  a large  number  of  new 
roots  were  put  out  by  the  plant  and  the  older  roots  seemed  to  be 
healthier  than  if  the  soil  had  not  been  aerated. 


Conclusions 


1.  Rice  Blight  (straight  head)  as  found  in  Arkansas  rice 
fields  is  not  caused  by  deep  flooding. 

2.  Moving  water  diminishes  the  amount  of  blight. 

3.  The  soil  should  be  in  good  physical  condition.  This  re- 
quires that  it  should  not  be  worked  when  too  wet.  Aeration  is 
aided  by  good  physical  condition. 

4.  Mineral  salts  have  no  effect  on  blight. 

5.  The  addition  of  ground  limestone  has  no  effect  on 
blight.  It,  however,  produces  better  physical,  chemical,  and 
biological  conditions  that  may  be  favorable  to  the  growth  of  rice. 
About  a ton  of  ground  limestone  per  acre  should  be  added  to  the 
soil  at  least  once  every  three  years. 

6.  Blight  seems  to  be  a purely  physiological  condition,  the 
root  being  the  part  affected,  thereby  impairing  nutrition  and  re- 
ducing the  vitality  of  the  plant,  so  that  the  grain  does  not  develop. 

7.  Analyses  of  gases  taken  from  the  soil  at  any  time  after  the 
second  week  of  flooding,  show  a high  percent  of  carbon  dioxid 
and  a low  percent  of  oxygen. 


19 


8.  All  results  show  that  good  physical  condition  of  the  soil, 
with  aeration  at  the  proper  time,  will  prevent  blight.  (Figs.  6,  7, 
and  8.) 

9.  No  relation  exists  between  blight  from  year  to  year.  It 
is  not  a fungous  or  bacterial  disease. 

10.  From  the  results  of  the  experiments  the  following  sug- 
gestions are  made  for  growing  rice: 

(a)  Prepare  the  soil  and  seed  the  rice  when  the  soil  is  in 
good  condition  to  work. 

(b)  Flood  the  rice  for  the  first  time  when  it  is  about  eight 
inches  high,  barely  covering  the  soil  with  water  for 
from  6 to  7 weeks.  If  the  land  is  foul,  the  first  flood- 
ing should  be  deep  enough  to  kill  the  weeds. 

(c)  Drain  and  aerate  for  two  or  three  weeks  at  the 
time  the  head  is  being  formed  in  the  “boot”. 

(d)  Flood  again  about  three  inches  deep  for  from  4 to  5 
weeks. 

(e)  Drain  off  gradually  until  time  to  dry  for  harvest. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 

URBANA,  MARCH,  1912 

CIRCULAR  NO.  157 


SOIL  FERTILITY* 

Illinois  Conditions,  Needs,  and  Future  Prospects 
By  Cyril  G.  Hopkins 

In  the  first  chapter  of  the  book  of  books  it  is  written: 

’’And  God  said  unto  them,  be  fruitful,  and  multiply,  and  replenish 
the  earth,  and  Subdue  it.” 

Of  these  four  commandments  we  have  obeyed  the  first  two, 
but  we  have  disobeyed  in  America,  since  1607,  the  last  two  of 
these  commandments. 

When  our  own  fathers  were  born  (and  many  of  them  are  still 
living),  there  were  17  million  people  in  the  United  States, — in 
1840;  but  the  census  of  1910  reveals  a population  of  92  millions  in 
contiguous  continental  United  States. 

Yes,  we  have  multiplied, — multiplied  by  500  percent  during 
the  full  time  of  one  life.  But  have  we  replenished  the  earth  and 
subdued' it?  Have  we  increased  our  acre-yield  by  500  percent? 
No,  we  have  not.  For  three  centuries  we  have  taken  from  the 
earth  and  have  not  replenished  it.  Neither  have  we  subdued  the 
earth,  but  we  have  been  subdued  by  it.  As  tillers  of  the  soil, 
men  made  in  the  image  of  God,  we  have  been  defeated  by  the 
inanimate  earth,  driven  out  from  our  eastern  states  and  forced  to 

‘Address  before  the  Illinois  State  Farmers5  Institute  at  Centralia, 
February  20,  1912. 


surrender  back  to  nature  millions  of  acres  of  once  fertile  farm 
lands,  now  agriculturally  abandoned,  to  such  an  extent  that  the 
congressmen  of  the  United  States  can  not  enter  the  capital  of 
this  great  nation  from  any  direction  without  passing  abandoned 
farms. 

Within  the  last  twelve  months  a five -hundred- acre  farm  of 
gently  undulating  upland  loam  soil  (which  I selected  because  of 
its  special  advantages)  has  been  purchased  for  $10  an  acre,  within 
15  miles  of  the  District  of  Columbia,  within  an  hour’s  ride  of  Bal- 
timore, and  within  two  miles  of  a railroad  station  on  two  railroads. 
A good  tract  of  this  farm  which  had  been  “rested”  for  several 
years  made  an  average  yield  of  12^2  bushels  of  corn  per  acre  in 
1911.  This  is  beautiful  farm  land,  which,  lying  at  the  door  of  our 
greatest  markets,  ought  to  be  worth,  not  $10  but  $300  an  acre, 
when  we  consider  that  our  rich,  almost  virgin  soil  nearly  a thous- 
and miles  farther  west  is  now  selling  for  $200  to  $250  an  acre. 
And  yet  that  land,  and,  likewise,  the  depleted  lands  of  southern 
Illinois  can  be  made  worth  $300  an  acre.  How?  By  the  profit- 
able investment  of  money  in  a rational  system  of  soil  improve- 
ment,— in  an  economic  system  of  positive  and  permanent  soil 
enrichment,  based  upon  established  science,  rather  than  upon  the 
advice  of  some  fertilizer  agent  who  has  some  high-priced  soil 
stimulant  to  sell,  which  enriches  not  the  soil  but  the  seller. 

Across  the  face  of  the  agricultural  building  of  the  University 
of  Illinois  are  these  words: 

“The  wealth  of  Illinois  is  in  her  soil,  and  her  strength  lies  in  its 
intelligent  development.” 

Those  words  were  spoken  by  Andrew  S.  Draper,  then 
President  of  the  University  of  Illinois,  now  Commissioner  of 
Education  for  the  State  of  New  York.  Truer  words  than  these 
were  never  spoken,  for  the  very  life  of  the  state  and  nation  rests 
upon  the  soil. 

While  manhood  and  womanhood  of  high  moral  character  and 
strong  intellectual  power  constitute  the  attainment  desired,  it  is 
also  true  that  the  possibility  of  this  attainment  depends  in  part 
upon  material  prosperity.  Poverty  does  not  build,  equip,  and 
man  consolidated  high  schools  in  country  districts.  The  general 
intelligence  and  wide-spread  education  of  the  American  people 


3 


are  the  result  of  our  past  prosperity,  and  they  should  be  both  the 
result  and  the  cause  of  the  future  prosperity  of  our  people. 

The  foundation  for  Illinois  prosperity  is  her  soil,  and  the 
future  prosperity,  educational  advantages,  and  general  intelli- 
gence of  her  people  will  depend  in  large  measure  upon  the 
improvement  and  preservation  of  the  soil.  It  is  the  farmer  who 
labors  together  with  God  in  the  creation  of  food  and  clothing 
materials.  Other  people  may  live  by  transporting,  milling  and 
trading,  but  the  renewal,  the  yearly  supply,  must  always  come 
from  the  soil. 

“Public  prosperity  is  like  a tree;  agriculture  is  its  roots;  industry 
and  commerce  are  its  branches  and  leaves.  If  the  root  suffers,  the  leaves 
fall,  the  branches  break,  and  the  tree  dies.” 

(This  is  the  philosophy  of  the  Mongolian  people  who  have 
maintained  some  of  their  soils  for  more  than  4,000  years.) 

Daniel  Webster  gave  us  the  following  words  of  wisdom: 

“Unstable  is  the  future  of  a country  which  has  lost  its  taste  for 
agriculture.  If  there  is  one  lesson  of  history  that  is  unmistakable,  it- 
is  that  national  strength  lies  very  near  the  soil.” 

Even  James  J.  Hill,  himself  a railroad  man,  financially  inter- 
ested almost  solely  in  the  commerce  of  the  country,  recently 
made  the  following  statement: 

“The  farm  is  the  basis  of  all  industry,  but  for  many  years  this 
country  has  made  the  mistake  of  unduly  assisting  manufacture,  commerce, 
and  other  activities  that  center  in  cities,  at  the  expense  of  the  farm.” 

All  must  admit  that  the  states  and  the  nation  turned  their 
lands  over  rapidly  and  generously  to  private  ownership,  and 
hitherto  the  federal  and  state  governments  have  also  left  largely 
to  private  interests  the  matter  of  soil  preservation;  but  all  must 
likewise  admit  that,  with  the  exception  of  the  market  gardens 
largely  maintained  with  waste  fertility  from  the  cities,  private 
interests  have  not  preserved  the  soil  of  America. 

No  longer  can  it  be  said  that  “Uncle  Sam  is  rich  enough  to 
give  us  all  a farm”.  In  his  address  before  the  recent  National 
Conservation  Congress,  the  President  of  the  United  States  re- 
ported that,  while  our  population  increased  by  21  percent  during 
the  last  decade,  the  area  of  farm  land  increased  less  than  5 per- 
cent; and  that  a further  increase  of  9 percent  will  include  all  the 
remaining  public  land  that  is  capable  of  cultivation. 


4 


When  we  became  unable  properly  to  feed  our  increasing 
population  by  increasing  our  acreage  of  farm  land,  we  began  de- 
creasing our  exportation  of  foodstuffs,  and  the  average  of  the  last 
five  years,  compared  with  an  average  of  the  five  years  ending 
with  1900,  shows  that  during  the  ten-year  period  our  exportations 
decreased  from  198  million  to  116  million  bushels  of  wheat,  and 
from  193  million  to  only  57  million  bushels  of  corn.  That  the 
limit  of  our  relief  is  near  in  this  direction  must  be  plain  to  all. 

Now  we  must  increase  our  acre-yields,  or  the  cry  from  an 
ever  increasing  population  against  the  high  cost  of  plain  living 
will  just  as  surely  bring  distress  and  disgrace  upon  this  great 
nation  as  it  has  upon  400  million  people  in  India  and  Russia, 
where  famine  is  now  looked  upon  as  a permanent  feature  in  the 
life  of  our  own  Aryan  race. 

Intelligent  optimism  is  admirable;  but  blind  bigotry  parad- 
ed as  optimism  is  condemnable.  There  seems,  however,  to  be  al- 
ways a few  people  who  can  live,  in  a sense,  on  “hotair”;  but  you 
.will  agree  that  something  more  substantial  will  be  required  to 
feed  and  clothe  in  reasonable  comfort  the  progeny  of  92  million 
people,  and  added  millions  of  immigrants;  and  this  grave  question 
needs  grave  consideration  by  men  and  women  of  influence. 

If  there  is  any  material  thing  which  should  be  guarded  and  pro- 
tected by  the  sovereign  power  of  the  state,  it  is  the  soil, — the  breast 
of  Mother  Earth  from  which  her  children  must  always  draw 
their  nourishment,  or  perish. 

Who  is  responsible  for  the  fact  that  the  ten-year  average 
yield  of  wheat  is  29  bushels  per  acre  for  the  German  Empire  and 
only  16  bushels  in  Illinois?  Is  it  the  farmer  who  works  the  land 
for  all  that’s  in  it,  from  early  till  late,  year  in  and  year  out?  Is 
he  solely  responsible  for  soil  depletion?  No,  the  responsbility 
rests  largely  with  the  people  of  influence,  whether  they  live  in 
town  or  country.  The  teacher,  the  preacher,  the  banker,  and 
the  statesman  are  more  responsible  than  is  the  average  farmer 
for  safe-guarding  the  foundations  upon  which  rests  the  future 
prosperity  of  the  state  and  nation. 

The  combined  area  of  Germany  and  Illinois  is  equal  only  to 
that  of  Texas,  but  in  Germany  agriculture  is  taught  is  23  univer- 
sities and  in  415  other  colleges  and  schools.  Were  the  present 
farmers  and  landowners  of  Illinois  taught  the  principles  of  soil 


5 


improvement  in  the  schools  which  they  attended,  or  were  they 
left  largely  to  the  teaching  and  influence  of  the  commercial 
fertilizer  trusts,  their  agents,  promoters,  advertisements,  and 
widely  circulated  pamphlets  and  newspaper  articles  whose  publica- 
tion is  paid  for  even  in  some  of  the  cheap  agricultural  journals? 

Average  crop  yields  for  the  past  46  years  are  now  reported 
by  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture.  The  details 
for  individual  states  are  not  available  to  make  two  23-year  aver- 
ages, but  it  is  possible  to  make  one  average  of  24  years,  followed 
by  another  average  of  22  years.  These  averages  for  the  entire 
United  States  show  that  the  yield  of  wheat  has  increased  by 
1 V2  bushels  per  acre  and  the  yield  of  oats  by  -J-  bushel,  while  the 
average  yield  of  corn  has  decreased  by  V2  bushel  and  that  of 
potatoes  by  f bushel  per  acre. 

The  fact  that  half  of  all  the  wheat  crop  of  the  United  States 
is  produced  in  the  five  states  of  Minnesota,  Kansas,  Nebraska, 
and  the  Dakotas,  emphasizes  the  important  place  that  virgin  soil 
has  occupied  in  maintaining  our  wheat  yield.  Less  than  20-year 
averages  are  not  at  all  trustworthy  for  the  consideration  of  small 
changes  in  yield  per  acre.  Thus,  if  we  interchange  .the  highest 
average  yield  of  corn  (30.8  bushels  in  1872;  and  the  lowest  aver- 
age yield  (16.7  bushels  in  1901),  then  the  above  comparison  would 
show  an  average  increase  of  0.7  of  a bushel  instead  of  a decrease 
of  V2  bushel  per  acre  in  the  corn  crop  of  the  United  States. 

I present  these  figures  because  they  furnish  the  best  statis- 
tics the  United  States  affords  concerning  the  question  as  to 
whether  our  crop  production  is  keeping  pace  with  our  needs.  You 
will  recognize  these  as  the  most  important  vegetable  and  grain 
crops  grown  in  this  state.  These  figures  show  an  average  increase 
in  acre  yield  of  less  than  1 percent  in  23  years,  while  the  United 
States  census  shows  an  increase  of  47  percent  in  our  population 
during  20  years;  and  yet  the  cities,  the  states,  and  the  national 
government  are  still  seeking  the  cause  of  the  increased  cost  of 
living  in  this  country. 

If  we  examine  the  corresponding  federal  crop  statistics  for 
Illinois,  we  find  increased  yields  of  5 bushels  per  acre  for  corn  and 
1 . 4 bushels  for  wheat,  while  the  yield  of  oats  has  decreased  by  1 . 4 
bushels  and  that  of  potatoes  by  2.4  bushels. 

The  increase  in  yield  of  corn  is  to  be  attributed  largely  to  two 


6 


factors:  First,  to  the  change  from  deep  to  shallow  cultivation; 
and,  second,  to  the  substitution  of  recognized  standard  varieties 
of  corn  for  most  of  the  scrub  varieties  formerly  grown. 

Better  drainage  and  better  crop  rotations  have  also  helped 
to  hide  the  fact  that,  as  a general  average,  the  corn-belt  soils  of 
Illinois  are  being  rapidly  depleted  of  their  fertility,  a fact  which 
is  revealed  to  some  extent  in  the  average  decreases  of  1.4  bushels 
of  oats,  2.4  bushels  of  potatoes,  and  .08  ton  of  hay  per  acre  in 
Illinois  during  the  23  years. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  increase  in  yield  of  wheat  in  this  state 
is  largely  due  to  the  system  of  soil  improvement  already  inaugu- 
rated in  the  great  wheat  belt  of  southern  Illinois.  I think  it  is 
safe  to  say  that  some  effort  to  enrich  the  soil  is  now  made  on  at 
least  one-third  of  the  land  annually  seeded  to  wheat  in  southern 
Illinois. 

For  ten  years  the  Experiment  Station  has  demonstrated  and 
recommended  definite  soil  treatment  for  improving  the  wheat  crop 
of  southern  Illinois.  Under  the  conditions  existing  on  most 
southern  Illinois  farms  we  have  advised  the  use  of  steamed  bone 
meal  at  the  rate  of  about  200  pounds  per  acre,  as  initial  treat- 
ment; and  the  use  of  this  material  reached  such  proportions  in 
southern  Illinois  that  several  years  ago  one  of  the  principal  pro- 
ducers withdrew  the  sale  of  steamed  bone  from  all  other  states  in 
order  to  supply  the  demand  in  Illinois. 

As  an  average  of  ten  crops  of  wheat  grown  in  a 3-year  rota- 
tion of  wheat,  corn,  and  cowpeas,  on  the  Cutler  Experiment  Field, 
in  Perry  county,  the  increase  from  steamed  bone  meal  has  been 
3%  bushels  per  acre  in  live-stock  farming  and  5 bushels  in  grain 
farming. 

As  an  average  of  9 years,  steamed  bone  meal  applied  to  the 
Odin  Experiment  Field  in  this  county  has  increased  the  yield  of 
wheat  by  8 bushels  per  acre  in  duplicate  tests  in  grain  farming  in 
a 4-year  rotation  of  corn,  cowpeas,  wheat,  and  clover. 

On  the  DuBois  Experiment  Field  in  Washington  county,  two 
wheat  crops  have  been  grown  during  the  ten  years  in  a 4-year  ro- 
tation of  corn,  oats,  wheat,  and  clover;  and,  as  an  average  of 
duplicate  tests,  13  bushels  increase  per  acre  was  the  effect  pro- 
duced by  steamed  bone. 

As  a general  average  of  these  forty-two  tests  extending  over 


ten  years  in  three  different  counties  on  the  common  prairie  land  in 
this  section  of  Illinois,  the  yield  of  wheat  has  been  increased  by 
6.6  bushels  per  acre;  and  where  both  bone  meal  and  lime  or  lime- 
stone have  been  applied  the  average  increase  on  the  same  experi- 
ment fields  has  been  11.7  bushels  of  wheat  per  acre. 

These  definite  results  plainly  show  the  possibility  of  increas- 
ing the  yield  of  wheat  in  this  section  by  the  use  of  phosphorus 
and  limestone,  the  two  materials  which  have  been  used  by  a very 
considerable  number  of  farmers  in  southern  Illinois  during  recent 
years.  The  crop  statistics  show,  also,  that  the  increase  in  yield 
of  wheat  in  Illinois  has  practically  all  taken  place  since  the  be- 
ginning of  soil  investigations  and  the  establishment  of  soil  ex-‘ 
periment  fields  in  southern  Illinois.  Thus  the  federal  statistics 
furnish  the  following  averages  for  the  yield  of  wheat  in  Illinois: 


For  24  years  1866  to  1889) 12.8  bushels 

For  11  years  <1890  to  1900  ) 13.0  bushels 

For  11  years  (1901  to  1911) 15.7  bushels. 


Furthermore,  the  crop  statistics  collected  independently  by 
the  Illinois  State  Board  of  Agriculture  furnish  the  following 
averages: 

For  24  years  1866  to  1889  13.2  bushels  . 

For  11  years  1890  to  1 900  .13.3  bushels 

For  11  years  (1901  to  1911) 16.4  bushels 

On  the  other  hand,  the  principal  increase  in  the  yield  of  corn 
in  this  state  occurred  before  1900,  as  is  shown  by  both  federal 
and  state  statistics,  and  these  facts  support  the  opinion  that  the 
corn  belt  has  increased  the  yield  of  corn  by  improved  methods  of 
cultivation,  influenced  directly  by  the  manufacturers  of  the  shallow 
cultivators,  which  were  quite  generally  adapted  some  twenty  years 
ago,  following  the  early  and  conclusive  experiments  of  Morrow 
and  Hunt  along  that  line;  and  later  by  the  use  of  better  seed 
corn.  That  the  increase  in  the  corn  belt  has  been  made  at  the 
expense  of  the  soil,  is  shown  by  the  decreased  yields  of  both  oats 
and  hay. 

These  data  support  another  opinion  which  is  based  upon 
even  more  definite  facts;  namely,  that  if  southern  Illinois  farmers 
continue  their  work  of  soil  improvement  to  the  extent  of  adopting 
truly  permanent  systems,  and  if  the  corn-belt  farmers  continue 


8 


their  past  and  present  methods  of  soil  depletion,  then  the  time 
will  come  when  the  people  from  the  north  will  again  go  down  in- 
to “Egypt”  to  buy  corn. 

Since  the  farmers  of  southern  Illinois  began  the  extensive 
use  of  steamed  bone  meal,  two  very  important  things  have  hap- 
pened: First,  the  price  of  steamed  bone  has  gone  up,  and,  second, 
the  quality  of  the  steamed  bone  sold  in  this  state  has  gone  down, 
— its  average  phosphorus  content  being  now  distinctly  less  than 
ten  years  ago. 

In  one  sense,  however,  these  changed  conditions  with  respect 
to  bone  meal  are  likely  to  result  in  greater  ultimate  benefit  to 
southern  Illinois  farmers,  because  they  are  added  inducements 
for  them  to  adopt  more  economical  and  truly  permanent  systems 
of  soil  improvement,  by  making  large  use  of  ground  limestone 
and  clover  jmd  other  legume  crops  and  crop  residues,  plowed 
under  directly  in  grain  farming,  or  in  farm  manure  in  stock  farm- 
ing; and  by  gradually  discontinuing  the  use  of  high-priced  bone 
meal  and  substituting  therefor  at  less  expense  two  or  three  times 
the  quantity  of  fine- ground  natural  rock  phosphate,  which  becomes 
available  when  plowed  under  with  plenty  of  vegetable  matter, 
such  as  clover,  cowpeas,  or  farm  manure. 

Let  us  remember  that  three  things  are  necessary  for  the 
most  profitable  improvement  and  permanent  preservation  of  our 
most  common  upland  prairie  and  timber  soils,  not  only  in  south- 
ern Illinois,  but  also  in  the  central  and  northern  parts  of  the 
state.  These  are  limestone,  organic  matter,  and  phosphorus. 

Limestone  is  needed  both  to  correct  the  acidity  of  the  soil 
and  to  supply  the  plant-food  element  called  calcium;  and  if  dolo- 
mitic  limestone  is  used,  both  calcium  and  magnesium  will  be  sup- 
plied. 

The  organic  matter,  or  vegetable  matter,  is  needed  to  supply 
nitrogen  which  can  be  secured  from  the  inexhaustible  supply  in 
the  air  by  the  legume  crops,  such  as  clover  and  cowpeas,  and  as 
this  vegetable  matter  decays  in  the  soil  it  liberates  potassium 
from  the  practically  inexhaustible  supply  of  that  element  contain- 
ed in  all  our  common  soils,  and  it  also  liberates  phosphorus  from 
the  low-priced  natural  rock  phosphate. 

Finally,  the  phosphorus  must  be  applied  because  the  supply 


9 


in  the  soil  is  small,  and  it  is  constantly  being  removed  by  the 
crops  grown. 

For  southern  Illinois  this  is  the  order  in  which  they  should 
be  used  in  the  most  economical  methods: 

First,  apply  2 to  5 tons  per  acre  of  ground  limestone. 

Second,  grow  clover  or  cowpeas. 

Third,  apply  1,000  to  2,000  pounds  per  acre  of  very  finely 
ground  natural  rock  phosphate,  to  be  plowed  under  with  the 
clover  or  cowpeas,  either  directly  or  in  the  form  of  farm  manure. 

In  central  and  northern  Illinois  the  same  materials  are  need- 
ed, but  there  the  limestone  may  take  third  place,  while  it  is  of 
first  importance  in  this  part  of  the  state. 

The  average  cost  of  ground  limestone  delivered  in  bulk  in 
carload  lots  at  the  farmer’s  railroad  station  in  southern  Illinois  is 
about  $1.25  per  ton;  and  2 tons  per  acre  every  four  years,  which 
is  sufficient  to  keep  the  soil  sweet,  would  cost  $2 . 50.  The  de- 
livered price  varies  from  85  cents  to  about  $1.15  per  ton  with- 
in 100  miles  of  the  Southern  Illinois  Penitentiary,  and  about  the 
same  from  other  plants.  This  amounts  to  less  than  $1.00  per 
acre  a year  for  limestone  applied. 

During  the  last  eight  years,  we  have  made  318  tests  to  deter- 
mine the  effect  of  lime  or  ground  limestone  on  crop  yields  in 
southern  Illinois.  These  tests  were  made  at  Odin,  Edgewood, 
Mascoutah,  DuBois,  Cutler,  Ewing,  Raleigh,  and  Vienna, — in  the 
counties  of  Marion,  Effingham,  St.  Clair,  Washington,  Perry, 
Franklin,  Saline,  and  Johnson.  They  include  79  tests  on  legumes 
(clover,  cowpeas,  and  soybeans),  122  tests  on  corn,  55  tests  on 
oats,  and  62  tests  on  wheat,  these  crops  being  grown  in  the  rota- 
tions practiced. 

As  an  average  of  all  tests  the  yield  per  acre  has  been  increas- 
ed by  V2  ton  of  hay  (exactly  .54  ton),  by  5.0  bushels  of  corn,  by 
6.6  bushels  of  oats,  and  by  4.0  bushels  of  wheat.  The  data 
secured  and  here  reported  are  amply  sufficient  to  justify  the  con- 
clusion that,  in  practical  economic  systems  of  farming  on  the 
common  prairie  and  timber  soils  of  southern  Illinois,  limestone, 
at  less  than  $1.00  per  acre  per  year,  will  produce  % ton  more 
clover  or  cowpea  hay,  5 bushels  more  corn,  6 bushels  more  oats, 
and  4 bushels  more  wheat  per  acre. 

Where  one  is  able  to  put  on  4 or  5 tons  per  acre  for  the  first 


10 


application  it  will  be  wise  to  do  so,  but  subsequent  applications 
need  not  be  more  than  2 tons  per  acre  every  four  years. 

As  an  average  of  the  first  two  years’  work  on  two  different 
experiment  fields  (Ewing  and  Raleigh)  where  the  initial  applica- 
tion was  about  5 tons  per  acre,  the  average  increases  were  % ton 
of  hay,  9Vi  bushels  of  corn,  8.9  bushels  of  oats,  and  3%  bushels 
of  wheat;  and,  as  the  increased  farm  manure  or  increased  crop 
residues  from  these  larger  crops  are  returned  to  the  land,  the 
effect  becomes  more  marked  in  subsequent  years. 

On  the  Vienna  experiment  field  in  Johnson  county  about  9 
tons  per  acre  of  ground  limestone  were  applied  ten  years  ago. 
At  a cost  of  $1.25  a ton  this  would  amount  to  $11.25,  and  the 
returns  for  this  investment  have  thus  far  amounted  to  90.3  bush- 
els of  corn,  or  to  42.2  bushels  of  wheat,  or  to  3%  tons  of  clover. 
Any  one  of  these  will  pay  for  the  limestone  three  times  over;  and, 
in  addition,  two- thirds  of  the  legume  crops  grown  have  been 
plowed  under  as  green  manure,  and  at  the  end  of  nine  years  with 
no  further  application,  the  land  treated  with  limestone  is  produc- 
ing 5 bushels  more  wheat,  9.3  bushels  more  corn,  and  1.4  tons 
more  clover  hay  per  acre  than  the  land  not  so  treated.  Indeed, 
as  an  average  of  the  last  two  years,  this  old  worn  hill  land  has 
produced  larger  crops  where  limestone  had  been  applied  than  the 
average  yield  for  the  state  of  Illinois,  for  each  of  the  crops,  corn, 
wheat,  and  hay. 

It  should  never  be  forgotton,  however,  that  phosphorus  must 
also  be  included  and  applied  with  the  vegetable  matter  if  a per- 
manent system  of  soil  improvement  and  preservation  is  to  be 
adopted.  While  liberal  use  of  limestone  and  the  return  of  the 
increased  vegetable  matter  will  make  marked  and  profitable 
improvement  in  southern  Illinois  soils,  yet  the  improvement  will 
be  temporary  unless  phosphorus  is  also  applied,  because  this 
element  is  present  in  the  soil  in  small  amount  and  it  is  removed 
in  crops  and  sold  from  the  farm  not  only  in  grain  and  hay,  but 
also  in  bone,  in  meat,  and  in  milk. 

The  only  exception  to  be  made  to  this  general  plan  for  the 
upland  soils  of  southern  Illinois  is  the  rolling  or  steeply  sloping 
hill  lands  where  marked  soil  erosion  occurs.  On  such  lands  only 
limestone  and  vegetable  matter  are  necessary,  because  the  supply 
of  phosphorus  is  naturally  renewed  from  the  subsoil,  which  grad- 


11 


ually  becomes  surface  soil  owing  to  the  surface  washing. 

On  the  common  land  of  southern  Illinois,  where  the  soil  is 
poor  in  decaying  vegetable  matter,  the  effect  of  phosphorus  is  not 
marked  on  corn,  oats,  or  cowpeas,  but  it  markedly  benefits  the 
wheat  and  also  helps  the  clover;  and  the  cumulative  effect  of  the 
increased  supply  of  clover  or  manure  is  then  seen  in  ail  crops. 

In  order  to  reduce  to  the  simplest  terms  the  results  secured 
from  soil  improvement,  it  is  necessary  to  assign  a money  value 
to  each  kind  of  produce;  and  it  should  be  kept  in  mind  that  while 
the  increase  in  yield  is  produced  in  the  field  with  no  extra  labor 
till  harvest,  it  is  not  taken  from  the  field  and  delivered  at  the 
market  free  of  expense;  consequently,  it  is  important  that  con- 
servative prices  shall  be  used  in  making  computations  to  show  the 
value  of  the  increase  from  soil  treatment 

The  standard  prices  used  by  the  Illinois  Experiment  Station 
for  such  computations  are  as  follows: 

Corn 35  cents  a bushel 

Oats 30  cents  a bushel 

Wheat 70  cents  a bushel 

Hay $6 . 00  a ton 

Clover  seed $6.00  a bushel 

Cowpea  or  soybean  seed $1.00  a bushel 

In  computations  of  this  character  we  do  not  include  any  value 
for  straw  or  corn  stalks. 

At  these  conservative  prices  for  the  farm  produce,  and  as  an 
average  of  . the  ten  years  from  1902  to  1911,  the  use  of  lime,  phos- 
phorus, and  organic  matter  at  Cutler  has  increased  the  value  of 
the  produce  from  four  acres  of  land  in  a rotation  of  corn,  wheat, 
and  legumes  from  $23 . 81  to  $47 . 64  in  grain  farming,  and  to  $49 . 05 
in  live-stock  farming,  the  organic  manures  being  dependent  upon 
the  crops  grown  on  the  land,  in  both  systems. 

A similar  comparison  for  grain  farming  in  a rotation  of  corn, 
cowpeas,  wheat,  and  clover  (or  soybeans)  on  the  Odin  Experi- 
ment Field  shows  the  crop  values  to  have  been  increased  from 
$29.62  to  $44.51  by  lime,  phosphorus,  and  organic  matter  pro- 
duced on  the  land. 

At  both  Cutler  and  Odin  the  phosphorus  is  supplied  in  the 
form  of  steamed  bone  meal,  but  on  the  Fairfield  Experiment  Field, 


12 


in  Wayne  county,  raw  rock  phosphate  and  ground  limestone  are 
used. 

As  an  average  of  the  last  four  years,  the  limestone  and  phos- 
phate at  Fairfield  have  increased  the  crop  values  on  four  acres 
from  $27.30  to  $40.30  in  grain  farming,  and  from  $35.02  to  $55.60 
in  live-stock  farming. 

We  have  no  land  on  the  Fairfield  field  to  which  neither  crop 
residues  nor  farm  manure  is  applied,  and  this  experiment  field 
has  been  in  progress  for  only  seven  years.  Since  we  lack  three 
years  for  the  ten-year  record  at  Fairfield,  we  also  omit  the  first 
three  years’  records,  and  thus  compare  the  results  of  a four- year 
period,  with  the  rotation  well  underway,  with  the  ten- year  aver- 
ages from  Cutler  and  Odin. 

We  thus  find  that  lime  and  bone  meal  have  increased  the 


value  of  crops  from  four  acres  as  follows: 

Odin,  grain  farming $11.89 

Cutler,  grain  farming 17.43 

Cutler,  live  stock  farming 12.20 

Cost  of  lime  ($2.50)  and  bone  meal  ($10) 12.50 

We  likewise  find  that  limestone  and  rock  phosphate  have 
produced  the  following  results: 

Fairfield,  grain  farming $13.00 

Fairfield,  live-stock  farming 20.58 


Cost  of  limestone  ($2.50)  and  phosphate  ($7 . 50)  10.00 
It  should  be  stated  that  the  application  of  manure  at  Fair- 
field  was  begun  seven  years  ago,  the  first  applications  having 
been  made  at  the  rate  of  8 tons  per  acre,  whereas  the  plowing 
under  of  the  crop  residues  in  the  grain  system  has  been  prac- 
ticed only  during  the  last  two  or  three  years.  This  probably  ac- 
counts for  the  better  utilization  of  the  phosphate  in  the  live-stock 
system  at  Fairfield,  although  where  the  addition  of  organic  mat- 
ter is  fairly  comparable  in  the  two  systems  the  added  phosphorus 
usually  gives  the  greater  gain  in  grain  farming,  as  at  Cutler,  be- 
cause there  is  less  phosphorus  returned  in  the  crop  residues  than 
in  the  farm  manure.  As  a general  average  these  prices  show 
$13.84  returned  at  a cost  of  $12.50  where  bone  meal  was  the 
source  of  phosphorus;  while  the  average  return  was  $16.79  at  a 
cost  of  $10.00  where  rock  phosphate  was  used.  In  addition  we 
have  the  fact  that  we  are  enriching  the  soil  in  phosphorus  two 


13 


and  one-half  times  as  much  where  raw  rock  phosphate  is  used  as 
where  bone  meal  is  applied;  and  of  course  the  annual  expense  for 
rock  phosphate  will  be  greatly  reduced  after  the  soil  becomes 
sufficiently  rich  in  phosphorus  to  produce  the  most  profitable 
crop  yields. 

As  an  average  of  the  four  years  at  Fairfield,  the  limestone 
and  phosphate  costing  $2.50  per  acre  per  annum  have  increased 
the  yield  per  acre  by  4.8  bushels  of  corn,  by  13.7  bushels  of 
wheat  (three  years;  oats  increased  by  6.3  bushels  one  year),  by 
3.4  bushels  of  cowpeas  (or  soybeans),  and  by  .93  ton  of  hay. 

During  the  last  eight  years  on  typical  corn-belt  prairie  soil 
on  the  South  Farm  of  the  University  of  Illinois,  at  Urbana,  we 
have  practiced  on  four  different  fields  a 4-year  rotation  including 
wheat,  corn,  oats,  and  clover.  On  each  field  we  have  four  differ- 
ent plots  which  receive  1 ton  per  acre  of  raw  rock  phosphate  in 
comparison  with  check  plots  which  are  otherwise  cropped  and 
cultivated  the  same. 

As  an  average  of  the  eight  years  the  phosphate  has  increased 
the  crop  yields  per  acre  by  8.1  bushels  of  wheat,  by  4.7  bushels 
of  corn,  by  4.0  bushels  of  oats,  and  by  .42  ton  of  clover  hay  (or 
bushel  of  clover  seed). 

The  cost  of  the  phosphate  applied  is  not  more  than  $7 . 50  per 
acre  for  each  four  years,  and,  at  present  prices  for  the  farm  pro- 
duce, it  has  paid  for  itself  several  times,  and  the  plowed  soil  of 
the  treated  land  is  now  one-fourth  richer  in  phosphorus  than  the 
land  not  treated  with  phosphate. 

But  if  we  figure  the  value  of  the  increase  at  35  cents  a bushel 
for  corn,  30  cents  for  oats,  and  70  cents  for  wheat,  and  at  $6.00  a 
ton  for  clover  hay  (or  $6.00  a bushel  for  clover  seed),  the  phos- 
phate costing  $7 . 50  paid  back  $9.04  during  the  first  four  years, 
and  $13.13  during  the  second  four-year  period. 

This  shows  very  substantial  profit  at  most  conservative  prices, 
but  of  even  greater  importance  is  the  fact  that  the  system  is  one 
of  positive  soil  enrichment  and  permanent  preservation.  The 
phosphorus  content  of  the  plowed  soil  has  increased  from  1100  to 
1500  pounds  per  acre  during  the  eight  years  in  spite  of  the  larger 
crops  removed,  whereas  the  untreated  soil  has  grown  poorer  by 
about  65  pounds  of  phosphorus  per  acre. 


14 


Attention  is  called  to  the  fact  that  in  the  oldest  continuous 
fertilizer  experiments  of  the  United  States,  which  are  in  progress 
at  the  Pennsylvania  State  College,  there  are  four  different  fields 
and  the  same  four  crops  are  grown  but  in  the  order  of  corn,  oats, 
wheab,  and  clover.  In  these  experiments  $5.04  worth  of  acid 
phosphate  per  acre  is  applied  every  four  years,  but  this  paid 
back  only  $11.84  during  the  first  eight  years,  at  prices  mentioned 
above.  Thus  the  actual  return  per  dollar  invested  was  less  than 
in  these  Illinois  experiments  with  raw  rock  phosphate;  and  while 
the  raw  phosphate  furnishes  250  pounds  of  phosphorus  for  $'7.50, 
the  acid  phosphate,  which  would  cost  $5.04  in  Illinois,  would 
supply  only  42  pounds  of  phosphorus,  and  this  is  less  than  we 
actually  remove  in  the  crops  from  our  well- treated  land. 

In  addition,  I would  only  emphasize  the  fact  that  accumulat- 
ing results  from  Illinois  soil  investigations  support  the  conclusion 
that  for  the  most  economic  and  profitable  systems  of  permanent 
agriculture  in  general  farming,  we  should  make  large  use  of 
natural  materials  including  for  normal  soils  ground  limestone, 
raw  rock  phosphate,  and  organic  matter  to  be  supplied  by  plow- 
ing under  legume  crops  and  other  crop  residues,  either  directly 
or  in  farm  manure. 

In  closing,  I beg  the  privilege  of  expressing  to  the  Illinois 
State  Farmers’  Institute  my  own  appreciation  of  the  honor  of  hav- 
ing been  invited  for  ten  consecutive  years  to  occupy  a place  on 
your  program.  I also  appreciate,  and  I want  you  to  understand 
and  appreciate,  that  I come  only  as  the  spokesman  for  those  who, 
as  investigators  and  advisers,  have  been  working  together  in 
unity  for  a decade  to  discover  and  demonstrate,  and  to  bring  about 
the  adoption  of,  systems  of  permanent  profitable  agriculture  in 
this  state. 

The  original  conception  of  the  need  and  possibilities  of  the 
work  was  not  mine,  but  only  one  of  many  fundamental  and  far- 
sighted conceptions  of  Eugene  Davenport. 

In  the  formation  and  gradual  completion  of  definite  plans  of 
procedure,  the  Soils  Advisory  Committee  from  this  Institute  has 
had  large  part;  and  the  names  of  Allen  and  Mann,  of  Abbott, 
Mason,  and  Burroughs  are  honored  by  all  who  know  of  the  help- 
ful, serious  thought,  the  vital  energy,  the  weeks  of  time,  and  the 
personal  sacrifice  that  these  patriotic  citizens  of  the  common- 


15 


wealth  have  annually  devoted  to  this  work.  In  some  respects  it 
has  been  pioneer  work,  and,  as  most  of  you  know,  we  have  at 
times  been  compelled,  by  the  force  of  truth  and  fact  and  interest 
in  permanent  agriculture,  to  break  away  from  some  of  the  teach- 
ing of  other  investigators,  and  from  some  of  the  practice  in  other 
states  and  countries;  and  I cannot  fully  express  to  you  the  grati- 
tude and  admiration  we  hold  for  those  progressive  and  influential 
farmers  of  Illinois  who,  with  judgment  and  with  effect,  have 
stepped  out  when  necessary  into  public  view,  in  the  press  or  on 
the  platform,  have  placed  their  shoulder  under  the  load,  and  sup- 
ported the  truth  by  their  own  knowledge  of  methods  applied  in 
practice. 

And  the  success  thus  far  attained  in  carrying  forward  the 
detailed  investigations  in  this  great  movemen  t,  for  the  restoration , 
improvement,  and  permanent  preservation  of  Illinois  soils,  is  very 
largely  due  to  the  accuracy,  integrity,  and  almost  tireless  energy 
of  my  own  associates. 

Without  such  men  as  Readhimer,  Pettit.  Eckhardt,  Gustaf- 
son, Logan,  Fisher,  Van  Alstine,  Whitchurch,  Hoskins,  and 
others,  no  such  progress  would  have  been  possible  in  this  service 
for  the  people  of  Illinois. 

Note:  For  greater  details  concerning  Illinois  soils  and  methods  of 

soil  improvement  see  the  following  publications; 

Circular  110,  “Ground  Limestone  for  Acid  Soils” 

Circular  127,  “Shall  we  use  Natural  Phosphate  or  Manufactured 
Acid  Phosphate  for  the  Permanent  Improvement  of  Illinois 
Soils?” 

Circular  129,  “The  Use  of  Commercial  Fertilizers” 

Circular  141,  “Crop  Rotation  for  Illinois  Soils” 

Bulletin  123,  “The  Fertility  in  Illinois  Soils” 

Soil  Reports  Nos.  1 and  2,  which  report  the  detail  soil  survey  for 
Clay  county  and  Moultrie  county,  respectively,  which  are 
largely  representative  (1  of  the  great  wheat  belt  of  Southern 
Illinois,  and  (2)  of  the  still  greater  whe^t  belt  of  the  central 
and  northern  parts  of  the  State.  ^ 

or 


16 


State  Advisory  Committee  ox  Soil  Investigations 

Ralph  Allen,  Delvan  1 
F.  I.  Mann,  Gilman 
A.  N.  Abbott,  Morrison 
J.  P.  Mason,  Elgin 

E.  W.  Burroughs,  Edwardsville 

Agricultural  Experiment  Station  Staff  on  Soil  Investigations 
Eugene  Davenport,  Direclor 

Cyril  G.  Hopkins,  Chief  in  Agronomy  and  Chemistry 

Soil ^Survey — 

J.  G.  Mosier,  Chief 
A.  F.  Gustafson,  Associate 
S.  V.  Holt,  Assistant 
H.  W.  Stewart,  Assistant 
H.  C.  Wheeler,  Assistant 

F.  A.  Fisher,  Assistant 
P.  E.  Karraker,  Assistant 

F.  M.  W.  Wascher,  Assistant 
Soil  Analysis — 

J.  H.  Pettit,  Chief 

E.  Van  Alstine,  Associate 
J.  P.  Aumer,  Assistant 
Gertrude  Niederman,  Assistant 
W.  H.  Sachs,  Assistant 

W.  R.  Leighty,  Assistant 

F.  W.  Muncie,  Assistant 
J.  T.  Flohil,  Assistant, 

Soil  Experiment  Fields — 

J.  E.  Readhimer,  Superintendent 
Wm.  G.  Eckhardl,  Associate 
0.  S.  Fisher.  Assistant 
J.  E.  Whitchurch,  Asssistant 

E.  E.  Hoskins,  Assistant 

F.  W.  Garrett,  Assistant 
F.  G.  Bauer,  Assistant 

Soils  Extension — 

C.  C.  Logan.  Associate 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 

URBANA,  MARCH,  1912 

CIRCULAR  NO.  158 


TUBERCULOSIS 

A PL/AIN  STATEMENT  OF  FACTS  REGARDING  THE  DISEASE, 
PREPARED  ESPECIAEEY  FOR  FARMERS  AND 
OTHERS  INTERESTED  IN  EIVE  STOCK 


BY  THE 

International  Commission  of  the  American  Veterinary 
Medical  Association  on  the  Control  of  Bovine  Tuberculosis 


This  presentation  of  facts  concerning  tuberculosis  in  live  stock 
was  prepared  by  an  international  commission  of  the  American  Vet- 
erinary Medical  Association  (see  page  24)  and  was  published  by 
the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture  as  Farmers’  Bulletin 
473  and  by  the  Canadian  Department  of  Agriculture  under  date 
of  1911.  It  is  now  republished  as  University  of  Illinois  Agricul- 
tural Experiment  Station  Circular  No.  158,  because  the  matter  is 
of  such  vast  importance  and  is  so  plainly  and  authoritatively  set 
forth.  The  compilation  accurately  represents  the  best  existing  in- 
formation  upon  the  subject.  g Davenport, 

Director. 


Contents. 


page. 

Nature  of  the  disease  3 

History  3 

Importance  4 

Symptoms  6 

Post-mortem  appearances  9 

The  tubercle  bacillus  io 

How  the  disease  spreads  13 

How  a herd  is  infected  15 

The  tuberculin  test  16 

What  is  tuberculin?  17 

Reliability  of  the  test  17 

Limitations  of  the  test  17 

Protective  inoculation  18 

Suppression  of  the  disease  18 

Sanitation  20 


Illustrations. 

PAGE. 

Fig.  1.  An  apparently  healthy  cow  affected  with  tuberculosis  4 

2.  An  apparently  healthy  cow  affected  with  tuberculosis  5 

3.  An  apparently  healthy  cow  affected  with  tuberculosis  6 

4.  An  apparently  healthy  cow  affected  with  tuberculosis  . . 

5.  A cow  affected  with  long-standing,  advanced  tuberculosis 

6.  A cow  in  an  advanced  stage  of  tuberculosis 9 

7.  A tuberculosis  bull  in  apparently  healthy  condition 10 

8.  Section  of  a tuberculosis  udder  from  a cow  11 

9.  Section  of  a tuberculosis  liver  from  a cow  12 

10.  Section  of  a tuberculosis  lung  from  a cow  13 

11.  Sections  of  a tuberculosis  heart  from  a cow  14 

12.  Tuberculosis  of  the  omentum  or  caul  15 

13.  Tuberculosis  of  the  omentum  or  caul  16 


tx  00 


TUBERCULOSIS 

A Plain  Statement  or  Facts  Regarding  the  Disease 

Tuberculosis  is  a widespread  disease  affecting  animals  and  also 
man. 

Human  beings  and  cattle  are  its  chief  victims,  but  there  is  no 
kind  of  animal  that  will  not  take  it.  Hogs  and  chickens  are  quite 
often  affected ; horses,  sheep,  and  goats  but  seldom,  while  cattle  are 
the  most  susceptible  of  all  animals. 

Nature  or  the  Disease 

Tuberculosis  is  contagious,  or  “catching.”  It  spreads  from  cow 
to  cow  in  a herd  until  most  of  them  are  affected.  This  may  not 
attract  much  notice  from  the  owner,  as  the  disease  is  slow  to  de- 
velop and  a cow  may  be  affected  with  it  for  several  months  and 
sometimes  years  before  any  signs  of  ill  health  are  to  be  seen. 

This  slow  development  is  the  chief  reason  for  the  great  loss  it 
causes  to  the  farmer.  He  does  not  suspect  its  presence  in  his  herd 
until  perhaps  a large  number  are  diseased.  If  the  disease  developed 
rapidly  and  caused  death  in  a few  days,  the  owner  would  soon  take 
steps  to  check  its  progress  and  protect  the  rest  of  his  herd.  Tuber- 
culosis is  slow  and  hidden  in  its  course  and  thus  arouses  no  sus- 
picion until  great  damage  is  done. 

History 

Where  did  tuberculosis  come  from?  We  do  not  know.  History 
records  it  from  the  earliest  times. 

Over  a century  ago  its  contagious  nature  was  suspected  and 
many  facts  were  recorded  to  prove  that  it  must  be  “catching.”  Doc- 
tors differed  about  it  and  for  a long  time  the  question  was  hotly 
disputed.  Finally  it  was  settled  by  Dr.  Robert  Koch,  a distinguished 
German  physician,  who  discovered  the  germ  of  the  disease  in  the 
year  1882,  and  named  it  Bacillus  tuberculosis.  He  proved  by  ex- 
periment that  the  disease  is  produced  by  these  germs  and  without 
them  the  disease  can  not  be  produced.  It  is  now  universally  ad- 
mitted that  tuberculosis  is  a contagious  disease  and  may  be  trans- 
mitted from  animal  to  man. 

In  America  the  disease  was  introduced  with  early  importations 
of  cattle  and  has  been  with  us  ever  since.  Modern  methods  of 
transportation  by  rail  and  water  have  spread  the  disease  from  one 
end  of  the  continent  to  the  other.  No  part  of  the  country  is  en- 
tirely free  from  it,  but  it  is  more  prevalent  near  the  great  centers 
of  population  than  in  the  remoter  parts. 


Importance: 


The  importance  of  the  disease  must  be  estimated  from  two 
points  of  view,  first,  the  loss  it  entails  upon  the  cattle  owner,  and, 
second,  the  danger  of  communication  to  human  beings. 


Fig.  1. — An  apparently  healthy  cow  affected  with  tuberculosis.  She  does  not 
cough,  her  appetite  is  good,  she  seems  strong  and  vigorous,  and  gives  an  un- 
usually large  quantity  of  milk.  At  the  time  the  picture  was  taken  it  was 
known  that  she  had  been  tuberculous  at  least  four  years  and  that  she  had 
been  passing  large  numbers  of  tuberculosis  germs  from  her  body  at  least 
three  years.  Since  it  first  became  known  that  the  cow  was  diseased  she  has 
given  birth  to  four  calves. 


Consider  first  its  effect  upon  the  pocket  of  the  owner  ot  cattle, 
whether  farmer,  breeder,  or  dairyman.  A serious  percentage  of 
the  dairy  cows  of  the  continent  are  affected,  and  the  disease  is 
found  in  even  a larger  percentage  of  dairy  herds.  The  disease  is 
commoner  in  some  regions  than  in  others. 

It  is  no  uncommon  thing  to  find  as  many  as  70  or  80  percent  of 
the  cows  in  a herd  diseased.  These  animals  will  be  in  various  stages 
of  the  disease,  some  recently  infected  showing  no  sign  of  ill  health, 
others  badly  diseased,  but  outwardly  appearing  healthy,  while  a 
few  are  evidently  breaking  down  and  wasting  away. 

The  loss  to  the  owner  is  evident  when  a cow  dies  of  the  disease, 
or  when  an  apparently  healthy  cow  is  slaughtered  for  beef  and 
found  so  badly  affected  as  to  be  unfit  for  food. 

The  calves  in  such  a herd  do  not  long  remain  healthy.  They 
catch  the  disease  before  they  are  many  months  old  and  are  a source 
of  loss  instead  of  gain. 


5 


Although  the  disease  is  most  frequently  found  in  herds  that  are 
more  or  less  closely  confined,  such  as  dairy  herds  and  purebred  cat- 
tle, other  herds  are  by  no  means  free  from  it.  Even  range  cattle 
are  sometimes  affected,  and  the  infection  spreads  in  spite  of  the 
open-air  life  of  the  cattle. 

Tuberculosis  is  common  among  hogs.  The  public  abattoirs  re- 
port that  a serious  percentage  of  all  hogs  inspected  is  found  to  be 
tuberculous. 

The  aggregate  of  these  losses  among  cattle  and  hogs  is  enor- 
mous, amounting  to  millions  of  dollars  every  year,  besides  materi- 
ally decreasing  the  food  supply  of  the  country. 


Fig.  2. — An  apparently  healthy  cow  affected  with  tuberculosis.  She  does  not 
cough,  her  appetite  is  good,  she  gives  a large  quantity  of  milk,  and  is  in  ex- 
cellent general  condition  for  a dairy  cow.  At  the  time  the  picture  was  taken 
it  was  known  that  she  had  been  affected  with  tuberculosis  at  least  four 
years  and  that  she  had  been  passing  tuberculosis  germs  from  her  body  at 
least  three  years.  The  mixed  dung  of  this  cow  and  of  the  cow  shown  in 
figure  3 caused  tuberculosis  in  hogs  that  were  permitted  to  eat  it. 


Turning  to  the  other  aspect  of  the  case,  the  danger  of  infection 
of  human  beings  with  tuberculosis  from  cattle,  we  have  only  to  con- 
sider a few  facts  to  realize  its  vital  importance  to  every  community. 

Milk  is  the  staple  food  of  infants  and  young  children  and  is 
usually  taken  in  the  raw  state.  If  this  milk  is  from  a tuberculous 
cow,  it  may  contain  millions  of  living  tubercle  germs.  Young  chil- 
dren fed  on  such  milk  often  contract  the  disease,  and  it  is  a fre- 
quent cause  of  death  among  them. 


6 


Meat  from  tuberculous  cattle  is  not  so  likely  to  convey  the  in- 
fection, for  several  reasons.  It  does  not  so  frequently  contain  the 
germs,  cooking  destroys  those  that  may  be  present,  and,  lastly,  meat 
is  not  consumed  by  very  young  children. 


Fig.  3. — An  apparently  healthy  cow  affected  with  tuberculosis.  She  does  not 
cough,  her  appetite  is  good,  and  her  general  condition  is  excellent  for  a milch 
cow  that  has  recently  calved.  At  the  time  the  picture  was  taken  it  was 
known  that  she  had  been  affected  with  tuberculosis  at  least  four  and  one-half 
years  and  that  she  had  been  passing  tuberculosis  germs  from  her  body  for 
a long  time.  The  calf  by  her  side  is  the  fourth  she  has  produced  in  the  last 
four  years.  Small  quantities  of  her  dung  caused  tuberculosis  in  guinea  pigs 
when  it  was  placed  under  their  skin.  The  mixed  dung  of  this  cow  and  of  the 
one  shown  in  figure  2 caused  tuberculosis  in  hogs  that  were  permitted  to 
eat  it. 


Symptoms 

Before  describing  the  symptoms  or  signs  by  which  tuberculosis 
is  recognized  or  suspected  in  a living  animal  it  is  well  to  state  that 
there  is  no  symptom  that  can  be  relied  on  with  certainty.  Any  of 
the  symptoms  may  sometimes  be  caused  by  some  other  disease,  and 
not  one  of  them  is  characteristic  of  tuberculosis  alone. 

Many  of  the  symptoms  that  are  relied  on  by  the  human  physician 
in  reaching  his  opinion  are  not  available  in  examining  cattle.  The 
thickness  of  the  skin  and  chest  wall,  for  instance,  makes  it  difficult 
to  detect  a diseased  condition  of  their  lungs  by  listening  to  the 
sounds  made  in  breathing,  whereas  this  is  comparatively  easy  in 
human  beings. 


7 


It  must  also  be  clearly  remembered  that  cattle  may  be  very  badly 
diseased  and  yet  show  no  symptoms  of  ill  health.  They  may  be  fat 
and  sleek,  looking  the  picture  of  health,  while  their  lungs  and  other 
organs  are  full  of  tubercles.  Such  cases  can  only  be  detected  by 
the  tuberculin  test. 

As  tuberculosis  may  attack  almost  any  organ  of  the  body,  we 
may  have  in  each  case  the  symptoms  connected  with  the  part  af- 
fected as  well  as  those  affecting  the  general  state  of  the  body  as  a 


Fig.  4. — An  apparently  healthy  cow  affected  with  tuberculosis.  This  cow  is  in 
excellent  condition  for  an  animal  that  has  been  affected  with  tuberculosis 
more  than  four  years.  Three  years  before  the  picture  was  taken  tuberculosis 
germs  were  found  in  her  dung,  and  hogs  that  were  permitted  to  eat  it  be- 
came tuberculous.  About  two  and  one-half  years  before  the  picture  was  taken 
it  was  found  that  her  milk  contained  tuberculosis  germs.  There  was  nothing 
visible  about  the  udder  to  show  that  it  was  diseased,  and  it  was  only  after 
two  months  of  the  most  careful  tests  of  her  milk  that  an  expert  could  tell 
from  which  of  the  four  quarters  of  the  udder  the  disease  germs  were  being 
passed. 


whole.  We  will  take  up  in  detail  each  of  the  more  important  symp- 
toms suggestive  of  the  disease: 

Unthriftiness. — The  animal  is  not  doing  as  well  as  it  should  for 
the  care  and  feed  it  is  getting.  Its  coat  is  rough  and  its  skin  has 
lost  its  suppleness  and  feels  harsh  and  thick. 

Loss  of  -flesh. — Along  with  the  unthriftiness  is  noticed  a grad- 
ual loss  of  flesh;  the  animal  gets  thinner  from  week  to  week.  It 
appears  to  be  pining  away,  and  such  cows  have  been  known  to 
dairymen  for  a long  time  under  the  name  of  “piners”  or  “wasters.” 
After  a time  they  are  reduced  almost  to  skin  and  bone. 


8 


Cough. — This  symptom  is  only  present  when  the  disease  is  at- 
tacking the  lungs  or  some  part  of  the  breathing  organs.  It  is  not  a 
loud,  sonorous  cough,  but  rather  a subdued  and  infrequent  one,  and 
may  be  heard  only  at  such  times  as  when  the  stable  is  first  opened 
in  the  morning  or  when  the  animal  is  driven.  At  a later  stage  of 
the  disease  it  may  be  heard  at  any  time  of  the  day.  Cows  do  not 
usually  appear  to  cough  up  anything.  This  is  because  they  do  not 
spit.  Most  of  the  material  coughed  up  from,  the  lungs  is  swal- 
lowed, but  many  tuberculosis  germs  escape  from  the  mouth  in  the 
form  of  spray  or  are  discharged  from  the  nose. 

Enlarged  glands. — Enlargements  in  the  region  of  the  throat, 
especially  when  they  cause  difficulty  in  breathing,  are  very  apt  to 
be  due  to  tuberculosis. 


Fig.  5. — A cow  affected  with  long-standing,  advanced  tuberculosis,  with  large 
tuberculous  swellings  in  the  udder.  A year  before  the  picture  was  taken  the 
cow  was  discovered  to  have  udder  tuberculosis.  This  discovery  was  made  by 
injecting  some  of  her  milk  into  guinea  pigs;  there  was  nothing  in  the  ap- 
pearance or  external  condition  of  the  udder  at  first  to  show  that  it  was  dis- 
eased. How  very  dangerous  such  cows  are  may  be  judged  from  the  fact 
that  calves  that  are  permitted  to  drink  milk  from  tuberculous  udders  only 
a single  time  are  almost  certain  to  have  tuberculosis.  A small  amount  of 
milk  from  cows  like  those  in  the  above  picture  and  in  figure  4 mixed  with  the 
milk  of  other  cows  will  make  the  whole  of  it  dangerous  for  both  persons 
and  lower  animals. 


Loss  of  appetite. — This  symptom  is  not  seen  until  the  later 
stages  of  the  disease  when  the  animal  is  evidently  wasting. 

Bloating. — Sometimes  the  diseased  glands  in  the  chest  prevent 
the  usual  passage  of  gas  from  the  paunch  to  the  mouth  by  pressing 
on  the  gullet.  In  this  case  the  cow  suffers  from  bloating,  and  the 
paunch  is  often  greatly  distended  with  gas.  This,  however,  is  not 
a very  frequent  symptom. 


9 


Diarrhea . — Looseness  of  the  bowels  or  “scouring”  is  seen  in 
cattle  affected  with  the  disease  in  the  bowels.  This  kind  of  scour- 
ing cannot  be  cured  by  any  known  treatment. 

Hard  lumps  in  the  udder. — When  tuberculosis  attacks  the  udder 
no  change  can  be  detected  at  first,  but  after  a time  hard  lumps  can 


Fig.  6. — A cow  in  an  advanced  stage  of  tuberculosis.  She  is  very  weak  and 
thin,  but  is  a heavy  milker  and  in  her  weak  condition  cont'nues  to  give  an 
abundant  quantity  of  milk.  Cows  of  this  kind  are  unfortunately  too  numer- 
ous in  dairy  herds.  The  temptation  to  keep  such  cows  and  to  use  their  milk 
is  greater  than  some  persons  can  resist.  Such  cows  are  a great  danger  to 
other  animals  that  may  come  in  contact  with  them,  and  the  use  of  their  milk 
in  a raw  state  is  very  apt  to  cause  tuberculosis  alike  in  young  persons  and 
lower  animals. 


be  felt  in  some  parts  of  the  organ  after  it  is  milked  out.  Milk  from 
such  an  udder  must  not  be  used,  as  it  is  almost  certain  to  be  teem- 
ing with  germs  of  the  disease. 


Post-mortem  Appearances 

When  the  carcass  of  a cow  affected  with  tuberculosis  is  opened 
the  disease  may  be  found  in  any  part  of  the  body.  Lumps  (tuber- 
cles) may  be  present  in  the  substance  of  an  organ  such  as  the  lung 
or  liver,  or  they  may  be  growing  on  the  surface.  These  lumps  may 
be  so  small  as  to  be  scarcely  noticeable,  or  they  may  be  as  large  as 
the  closed  fist,  or  even  larger.  If  one  of  the  lumps  is  cut  open,  the 
inside  is  yellowish  and  grits  on  the  knife  like  sand,  or  else  is  of  a 
cheesy  nature,  soft  and  creamy,  or  hard  and  dry. 

The  lung  is  a favorite  place  for  tubercles,  and  should  always  be 
examined.  Lymph  glands  are  often  the  seat  of  tuberculous  changes 


10 


When  healthy  a lymph  gland  is  a little  rounded  body  not  much 
larger  than  a good-sized  bean,  the  largest  only  the  size  of  one’s 
thumb.  They  are  found  all  through  the  body,  and  when  healthy 
are  so  small  as  to  attract  very  little  attention.  Tuberculosis  may 
cause  them  to  grow  to  an  enormous  size,  sometimes  as  large  as  a 
child’s  head.  In  this  condition  they  are  similar  to  the  tuberculous 
lumps  already  described.  Those  lying  between  the  lungs  and  in 
the  throat  are  the  most  frequently  affected. 


Fig.  7. — A tuberculous  bull  in  apparently  healthy  condition.  The  picture  was 
taken  nearly  four  years  after  he  was  first  known  to  be  tuberculous  and  three 
years  after  it  was  known  that  he  was  passing  tuberculosis  germs  from  his 
body.  Directly  after  his  picture  was  taken  he  was  killed,  and  in  addition 
to  numerous  nodules  of  tuberculosis  in  his  lungs  it  was  found,  when  his 
body  was  opened,  that  nearly  all  the  lymph  glands  connected  with  his  bowels 
and  liver  were  diseased.  At  the  time  of  his  death  the  bull  weighed  1,850 
pounds,  and  his  apparent  condition  was  excellent  for  an  animal  that  was 
fed  only  rough  forage  and  no  grain  in  any  form.  The  presence  of  tubercu- 
losis in  his  body  would  never  have  been  suspected  before  his  death  without 
the  help  of  the  tuberculin  test. 


Tubercles  may  be  found  in  any  part  of  the  body — glands,  lungs, 
liver,  bowels,  kidneys,  womb,  ud,der  and  even  bones.  The  muscles 
and  skin  are  seldom  affected. 


The  Tubercle  Bacillus 

The  germ  of  the  disease,  the  tubercle  bacillus,  is  a tiny,  slender, 
rod-shaped  body.  Several  thousands  of  them  placed  end  to  end 
would  be  needed  to  measure  an  inch,  so  that  they  are  quite  invisible 
to  the  naked  eye.  A powerful  microscope  is  needed  to  see  them. 


11 


Once  the  bacillus  has  gained  lodgment  inside  the  body  of  an 
animal,  it  begins  to  grow  and  multiply.  It  gets  longer,  and  when 
full  grown  divides  crosswise,  making  two  out  of  one.  Each  of 
these  goes  through  the  same  process,  the  two  become  four,  the  four 
eight,  the  eight  sixteen,  and  so  on  indefinitely. 


Fig.  8. — Sections  of  a tuberculous  udder  from  a cow.  Practically  the  whole  of 
the  udder  was  changed  into  tuberculous  material.  Long  before  tuberculous 
udders  become  as  badly  diseased  as  the  condition  shown  in  the  picture  the 
milk  contains  large  numbers  of  tuberculosis  germs  and  is  very  dangerous. 
A tuberculous  udder  may  contain  only  a single  small  tuberculous  swelling 
through  which  the  milk  becomes  dangerously  infected  with  tuberculosis 
germs. 


This  multiplication  takes  place  quite  rapidly  when  conditions 
are  favorable,  a few  hours  only  being  required  for  the  birth  of  each 
generation.  Nature,  however,  does  not  permit  this  process  to  con- 
tinue long  without  offering  some  resistance.  The  forces  of  the 
body  are  roused  to  action  and  a battle  begins  between  the  tissues 
of  the  body  and  the  army  of  the  invaders. 


12 


thicker  and  forms  a little  hard  lump  or  tubercle,  from  which  the 
disease  gets  its  name.  If  this  wall  is  complete  and  successfully 
imprisons  the  bacilli,  these  gradually  die  and  the  disease  in  that 
particular  spot  is  arrested. 

Frequently,  however,  both  these  safeguards  are  overcome.  The 
germs  break  through  the  barriers  and  are  carried  in  the  blood 
stream  or  lymph  channels  to  other  parts  of  the  body.  New  points 
of  attack  are  selected  and  the  process  begins  again  but  with  less 
chance  on  the  side  of  the  animal.  As  the  tubercles  increase  in  num- 
ber the  power  of  the  body  to  grapple  with  them  becomes  less  and 
less,  and  gradually  the  animal  falls  a prey  to  the  disease. 


The  first  line  of  defense  is  composed  of  the  white  cells  of  the 
blood,  which  hurry  to  the  scene  of  action  and  endeavor  to  destroy 
the  invaders  by  eating  them  up.  Sometimes  they  are  successful  and 
the  bacilli  are  destroyed,  the  infection  checked.  Often  they  fail  in 
their  object  and,  are  themselves  destroyed  and  the  multiplication  of 
the  germs  continues. 

The  second  line  of  defense  is  formed  by  the  cells  of  the  tissue 
invaded  by  the  germs.  These  cells  arrange  themselves  in  a circle 
around  the  germs  and  try  to  form  a living  wall  between  them  and 
the  rest  of  the  body.  This  barrier  gradually  becomes  thicker  and 


Fig.  9. — Sections  of  a tuberculous  liver  from  a cow.  The  light-colored  parts 

show  the  disease. 


13 


The  tubercle  bacillus  does  not  multiply  outside  the  body  of  an 
animal.  It  can  live  for  a long  time  in  favorable  surroundings,  such 
as  dark  and  dirty  stables.  Sunlight  soon  destroys  it.  Freezing  does 
not  hurt  it,  but  it  can  only  stand  a moderate  amount  of  heat.  Ex- 
posure of  1 490  F.  for  20  minutes  kills  it.  Protected  by  a layer  of 
dried  mucus,  such  as  is  coughed  up  from  the  lungs,  it  withstands 
drying,  light,  and  ordinary  disinfectants,  but  is  readily  killed  by 
steam  or  boiling  water. 


Fig.  10. — Section  of  a tuberculous  lung  from  a cow.  The  picture  shows  num- 
erous nearly  round  tuberculous  nodules,  one  large  tuberculous  cavity,  and 
several  air  tubes  that  extend  from  tuberculous  nodules  that  are  softening 
and  breaking  down.  When  tuberculous  nodules  in  the  lungs  break  down  the 
material  of  which  they  are  composed,  and  which  contains  millions  of  tuber- 
culosis germs,  is  coughed  up.  Some  of  the  germs  are  sprayed  from  the  mouth 
and  others  are  swallowed  and  discharged  with  the  dung. 


How  the  Disease  Spreads 

Sooner  or  later  the  tuberculous  cow  begins  to  give  off  the  germs 
of  the  disease.  The  germs  escape  by  the  mouth  and  nose,  the  bow- 
els, in  the  milk,  and  in  discharges  from  the  genital  organs.  When 
the  germs  are  being  given  off  in  any  of  these  ways,  the  disease  is 
known  as  open  tuberculosis. 

Germs  discharged  from  the  mouth  and  nose  are  coughed  up 
from  the  lungs  and  are  sprayed  over  the  food  in  front  of  the  cow 
or  are  carried  in  the  air  for  a time  until  they  fall  to  the  ground. 


14 


Cows  in  adjoining  stalls  may  take  in  these  germs  in  the  air  they 
breathe  or  in  the  food  they  eat  and  so  contract  the  disease. 

Germs  discharged  from  the  bowels  are  mixed  with  the  manure, 
and  may  infect  cattle  and  hogs  that  are  allowed  to  pick  over  the 
dung  heap.  The  practice  of  having  hogs  and  cattle  together  in  the 
same  yard  is  sure  to  result  in  the  infection  of  the  hogs  if  any  of  the 
cattle  are  affected.  The  germs  in  the  manure  come  from  matter 
that  is  coughed  up  and  swallowed,  and  in  some  cases  from  tuber- 


Fig.  11. — Sections  of  a tuberculous  heart  from  a cow.  The  light  parts  are  tu- 
berculous. The  heart  muscle  is  greatly  reduced  in  volume  and  is  prevented 
from  working  properly  by  the  tuberculous  material  by  which  it  is  surrounded. 
The  picture  shows  how  badly  an  animal  may  become  diseased  with  tubercu- 
losis before  it  dies.  One  reason  why  tuberculosis  is  so  common  among  persons 
and  cattle  is  that  many  persons  and  cattle  pass  tuberculosis  germs  from  their 
bodies  before  anyone  knows  or  suspects  that  they  have  tuberculosis  and  can 
give  the  disease  to  others. 


culosis  in  the  bowels  themselves.  Manure  containing  tubercle  germs 
may  easily  infect  the  milk.  Particles  of  dried  manure  may  fall  into 
the  milk  pail  from  the  skin  of  a dirty  cow  or  be  accidentally  flicked 
off  from  the  tail  and  fall  into  the  milk.  Straining  the  milk  after- 
wards only  removes  the  larger  particles.  The  smaller  ones,  includ- 
ing the  germs,  remain  in  the  milk. 


15 


When  the  udder  is  tuberculous  the  milk  contains  the  germs  in 
vast  numbers.  Such  milk  may  look  and  taste  perfectly  good,  but 
readily  transmits  the  disease  to  young  animals.  It  is  very  danger- 
ous to  children.  Hogs  and  calves  are  very  readily  infected  by  it. 


Fig.  12. — 'Tuberculosis  of  the  omentum  or  caul,  or  the  net  covering  the  bowels. 
This  form  of  tuberculosis  is  known  as  “pearl  disease,’’  because  the  tubercu- 
lous tumors  look  like  pearls. 


How  a Herd  is  Infected 

Tuberculosis  may  be  introduced  into  a healthy  herd  in  a num- 
ber of  ways : 

1.  By  the  purchase  of  a bull  or  other  animal  that  is  infected 
with  the  disease.  This  animal  may  be  apparently  healthy  at  the 
time  of  purchase,  but  if  it  contains  the  germs,  the  disease  may  de- 
velop and  spread  to  other  cattle.  New  animals  should  only  be 
bought  from  a herd  that  is  known  to  be  healthy. 

2.  By  feeding  calves  with  milk,  buttermilk,  or  whey  that  has 
come  from  tuberculous  cows.  A farmer  may  have  a healthy  herd, 
but  if  he  brings  home  skim  milk  from  a creamery  and  feeds  it  to 


16 


his  calves  he  may  give  them  the  disease.  Such  milk  should  be  ren- 
dered safe  by  boiling  or  pasteurizing  it. 

3.  By  showing  cattle  at  fairs  and  exhibitions  where  no  proper 
care  is  taken  to  keep  out  diseased  stock  or  to  disinfect  the  stables. 

4.  By  shipping  animals  in  cars  that  have  not  been  disinfected, 
as  these  may  have  recently  carried  diseased  cattle. 

5.  By  allowing  cattle  to  graze  with  diseased  ones,  or  to  come  in 
contact  with  them  over  fences. 


Fig.  13. — Tuberculosis  of  the  omentum  or  caul.  The  picture  shows  another 
form  of  “pearl  disease,”  in  which  each  nodule  is  about  the  size  of  a grape 
and  is  composed  of  a large  number  of  smaller  nodules  which  have  grown 
together. 


The  Tuberculin  Test 

Tuberculosis  develops  so  slowly  that  in  many  cases  it  is  months 
and  sometimes  years  before  any  symptoms  are  shown.  During  this 
period  the  infected  animals  cannot  be  distinguished  from  the  healthy 
in  any  ordinary  way.  There  is  a test,  however,  which  does  no  harm 
to  the  healthy  yet  detects  the  diseased  practically  without  fail.  This 


17 


is  known  as  the  tuberculin  test,  because  the  substance  used  in  mak- 
ing it  is  called  tuberculin. 

WHAT  IS  TUBERCULIN? 

Tuberculin  is  a fluid  containing  the  products  of  the  tubercle 
germ  without  the  germs  themselves.  As  it  contains  no  living  germs, 
it  cannot  convey  the  disease.  Great  skill  is  required  in  its  prepara- 
tion. A special  fluid  (or  culture  medium)  is  prepared  and  the  tu- 
bercle bacilli  planted  in  it,  great  care  being  taken  to  keep  all  other 
germs  out.  The  fluid  is  then  placed  in  a special  kind  of  incubator 
and  kept  at  the  temperature  of  the  animal  body.  Under  these  con- 
ditions the  germs  grow  and  multiply.  Gradually  the  fluid  becomes 
filled  with  the  products  of  the  germs.  When  the  right  point  is 
reached  the  fluid  is  heated  sufficiently  to  kill  the  germs,  which  are 
then  strained  out.  The  remaining  fluid  is  tuberculin. 

Tuberculin  does  not  harm  healthy  cattle,  even  in  large  doses, 
but  on  diseased  animals  it  produces  a marked  effect.  This  is  shown, 
by  a feverish  attack  which  comes  on  about  8 to  12  hours  after  the 
tuberculin  is  administered,  lasts  a few  hours,  and  then  subsides. 
This  temporary  fever  is  called  the  reaction,  and  animals  which  show 
it  are  called  reactors.  The  value  of  the  test  lies  in  the  fact  that  dis- 
eased animals  react,  while  healthy  ones  do  not. 

RELIABILITY  OB  THE  TEST 

The  tuberculin  test  in  the  hands  of  a competent  and  experienced 
man  is  much  more  accurate  than  any  other  method  of  detecting  tu- 
berculosis. The  records  of  large  numbers  of  tests  made  by  Govern- 
ment officials  show  that  with  certain  precautions  it  is  accurate  in  98 
percent  of  the  reactions  obtained.  This  gives  a margin  of  a pos- 
sible 2 percent  of  error,  and  this  small  number  may  be  still  further 
lessened  by  care  in  making  the  test.  For  practical  purposes  any 
animal  that  reacts  must  be  considered  tuberculous. 

LIMITATIONS  OB  THE  TEST 

The  test  should)  not  be  applied  to  cows  that  have  just  calved  or 
are  about  to  calve,  as  the  temperature  at  this  time  is  apt  to  vary  con- 
siderably from  the  normal.  For  this  same  reason  it  should  not  be 
applied  to  any  animal  that  is  in  a feverish  condition  from  any  cause. 

The  test  fails  to  detect  the  presence  of  the  disease  in  the  animal 
that  is  very  recently  infected.  The  disease  has  to  make  a little 
progress  before  the  test  reveals  its  presence,  and  in  the  beginning 
of  each  case  there  is  a period  between  the  entrance  of  the  germs  into 
the  body  and  the  time  when  they  have  multiplied  sufficiently  for  the 


18 


test  to  reveal  their  presence.  This  is  called  the  period  of  incuba- 
tion and  lasts  from  ten  days  to  two  months. 

When  the  disease  is  far  advanced  and  the  animal  is  wasting,  the 
test  sometimes  fails  to  detect  it.  This  is  not  of  much  practical  im- 
portance, as  such  cases  can  generally  be  recognized  without  the  aid 
of  tuberculin. 

Protective  Inoculation 

For  some  years  efforts  have  been  made  to  discover  a method  of 
rendering  cattle  immune  to  the  disease  in  such  a way  as  men  are 
protected  from  smallpox  by  vaccination.  Up  to  the  present  these 
efforts  have  been  only  partially  successful,  and  until  the  methods  in 
use  have  been  perfected  by  further  investigations  they  cannot  be 
recommended  as  of  practical  use  in  the  suppression  of  the  disease. 

Suppression  oe  the  Disease 

The  first  step  in  getting  rid  of  the  disease  is  to  find  out  how 
many  of  the  herd  are  affected  by  it.  This  is  done  by  applying  the 
tuberculin  test.  This  will  show  a larger  or  smaller  number  of  the 
herd  to  be  affected,  and  the  proper  course  to  pursue  will  depend 
largely  upon  the  proportion  of  the  reactors  in  it. 

Suppose  that  only  a few  cattle  react,  say  15  out  of  100,  or  in 
that  proportion.  In  this  case  the  reactors  are  first  carefully  exam- 
ined, and  if  any  of  them  show  symptoms  of  the  disease  by  cough- 
ing, loss  of  condition,  or  any  other  of  the  signs  by  which  the 
disease  is  recognized  without  the  test,  such  animals  should  be 
slaughtered. 

The  other  reactors  should  then  be  entirely  separated  from  the 
healthy  cattle.  If  possible  they  should  be  put  in  a separate  build- 
ing, but  if  this  cannot  be  done  a tight  partition  should  be  built  be- 
tween the  diseased  and  the  healthy  cattle  and!  separate  ventilation 
provided.  The  person  who  attends  to  the  reactors  should  not  go 
near  the  healthy  animals,  as  he  may  carry  the  infection  to  them  on 
his  hands,  clothes,  or  boots.  For  the  same  reason  the  feeding  and 
watering  must  be  done  with  separate  utensils. 

When  at  pasture  the  reactors  must  not  be  put  into  a field  where 
they  can  reach  across  a fence  to  healthy  cattle.  Whenever  a calf  is 
born  among  the  reactors  it  should  be  immediately  separated  from 
its  mother  and  brought  up  by  hand  or  on  a healthy  cow.  The  calf 
is  usually  born  healthy,  but  would  soon  catch  the  disease  from  its 
mother  if  allowed  to  remain  with  her. 

The  milk  of  reacting  cows  may  be  used  if  it  is  first  boiled  or 
heated  to  a point  sufficient  to  kill  the  germs.  This  heating  to  a 
point  less  than  boiling  is  called  pasteurizing,  and  is  safe  provided 
all  the  milk  reaches  the  required  degree  of  heat  and  is  kept  there 


19 


sufficiently  long.  For  this  it  is  necessary  to  keep  the  milk  for  20 
minutes  at  149°  F.  or  for  5 minutes  at  176°  F. 

This  system  of  dealing  with  tuberculosis  in  a herd  was  planned 
by  Prof.  Bang,  of  Denmark,  and  has  been  very  successfully  followed 
in  that  country  for  some  years.  It  has  the  advantage  of  allowing 
the  reactors  to  be  made  use  of  while  a sound  herd  is  being  built  up. 
Under  this  system  the  sound  herd  increases  in  numbers  as  healthy 
calves  are  added  to  it,  while  the  diseased  herd  becomes  smaller  as 
the  reactors  die  off  or  are  killed  as  open  cases  of  tuberculosis. 
Finally  a point  is  reached  where  only  a very  few  reactors  remain, 
and  the  owner  will  then  find  it  to  his  interest  to  kill  them  rather 
than  have  the  trouble  of  keeping  them  isolated. 

Some  time  is  required  for  the  successful  carrying  out  of  the 
Bang  system,  and  the  owner  must  be  prepared  to  follow  it  steadily 
and  faithfully  for  the  whole  time  that  is  needed,  which  may  be  sev- 
eral years.  During  this  time  the  healthy  herd  must  be  tested  every 
six  months  and  any  reactors  removed  to  the  diseased  herd.  At  the 
same  time  a sharp  lookout  must  be  kept  for  animals  showing  defi- 
nite symptoms  of  the  disease.  These  should  be  destroyed  promptly, 
as  they  are  the  most  dangerous  source  of  infection. 

Dealing  with  a badly  infected  herd. — Where  the  test  shows  more 
than  half  the  number  diseased,  a somewhat  different  plan  is  required 
from  the  Bang  system.  This  herd  is  so  badly  affected  that  the  non- 
reactors cannot  safely  be  considered  healthy.  Many  of  them  are 
sure  to  have  been  infected  with  the  disease  quite  recently,  so  that  the 
test  fails  to  detect  it.  These  will  react  at  the  next  test,  and  in  the 
meantime  may  develop  the  disease  so  rapidly  as  to  infect  others. 
This  will  repeat  the  difficulty  occurring  at  the  first  test,  and  it  would 
be  a long  and  tedious  process  of  weeding  before  even  a small  but 
perfectly  healthy  herd  could  be  established. 

For  these  reasons  it  is  better  to  treat  such  a herd  as  if  it  were 
entirely  diseased  and  to  begin  with  the  newborn  calves  to  build  up  a 
healthy  herd.  The  method  from  this  point  is  exactly  the  same  as 
the  Bang  system,  except  that  as  there  are  no  healthy  cows  to  act  as 
foster  mothers  the  calves  must  be  raised  on  pasteurized  milk.  At  6 
months  old  the  calves  are  tested  and  reactors  are  transferred  to  the 
other  herd.  This  plan  was  devised  by  a German  veterinary  surgeon 
named  Ostertag,  and  is  known  as  the  Ostertag  system.  It  is  very 
successful  when  carefully  carried  out. 

While  getting  rid  of  the  disease  by  whatever  system  mav  be 
adopted,  an  animal  should  never  be  bought  for  the  healthy  herd 
unless  known  to  be  healthy.  The  tuberculin  test  should  be  applied, 
and  if  possible  the  animal  should  be  selected  from  a herd  that  is 
known  to  be  free  from  tuberculosis.  New  purchases  should  be  iso- 
lated or  kept  apart  from  the  healthy  herd,  and  if  possible  from  each 


20 


other  for  at  least  three  months,  when  they  should  be  retested  to 
make  sure  they  are  healthy  before  putting  them  with  other  cattle. 

Sanitation 

Dark,  dirty,  crowded  stables  are  favorable  to  tuberculosis.  Un- 
der these  conditions  the  disease  spreads  rapidly  and  is  only  kept 
out  with  difficulty. 

Clean,  airy,  well-lighted  stables,  on  the  other  hand,  are  unfa- 
vorable to  the  development  of  the  disease.  If  brought  into  such  a 
stable  it  does  not  spread  so  rapidly  and  is  not  so  difficult  to  get  rid 
of  as  in  the  first  case. 

A well-built,  sanitary  stable  need  not  be  made  of  expensive  ma- 
terial or  of  elaborate  design,  but  should  have  plenty  of  light,  air, 
and  drainage. 

Light  is  very  important.  Direct  sunlight  is  a great  destroyer  of 
germ  life.  Tubercle  bacilli  soon  die  if  exposed  to  sunlight.  It  is  a 
disinfectant,  always  ready  to  work  without  cost.  Sunlight  is  also 
necessary  to  the  health  of  animals.  Men  deprived  of  it  for  any 
length  of  time,  as  prisoners  in  jail,  become  pale  and  lose  the  appear- 
ance of  health.  Cattle  that  are  constantly  confined  in  dark  stables 
become  lowered  in  vitality  and  are  ready  to  catch  any  disease  with 
which  they  come  in  contact.  For  these  reasons  the  cow  stables 
should  have  plenty  of  windows,  on  two  or  more  sides,  if  possible, 
so  that  the  sunlight  can  reach  every  part  of  the  interior  some  part 
of  the  day. 

Pure  air  is  also  very  important.  In  badly  ventilated  stables  the 
air  is  breathed  over  and  over  again  until  it  becomes  more  or  less 
poisonous.  Animals  kept  in  such  conditions  become  gradually  re- 
duced in  vitality.  This  change  may  not  be  noticeable  to  the  ob- 
server, but  becomes  apparent  if  the  animal  is  exposed  to  disease. 
It  easily  contracts  disease  and  does  not  recover  from  it  readily. 

Stables  should  therefore  have  plenty  of  air  space  for  each  ani- 
mal. This  requires  the  ceiling  to  be  high,  the  stalls  roomy,  and  the 
passages  wide.  In  addition  to  this  ample  air  space  some  way  of 
changing  the  air  in  a stable  must  be  provided.  This  is  done  by 
means  of  suitable  openings  in  the  walls  and  roof  and  comprises  the 
system  of  ventilation. 

Ventilation  to  be  successful  must  provide  for  two  things — first, 
the  removal  of  the  foul  air  from  the  inside,  and,  second,  the  bring- 
ing in  of  fresh  air  from  outside  the  building.  No  system  is  good 
that  fails  to  accomplish  these  objects  without  causing  unnecessary 
drafts. 

The  usual  way  is  to  bring  in  fresh  air  through  open  windows, 
and  in  cold  weather  through  ventilating  shafts,  which  may  be  con- 
cealed in  the  walls  or  beneath  the  floor.  The  foul  air  is  removed 


21 


by  open  windows  and  by  ventilating  shafts  from  the  ceiling  to  the 
roof,  where  they  are  usually  protected  by  a hood.  When  both  in- 
lets and  outlets  are  proportioned  to  the  size  of  the  building  there 
should  be  a constant  circulation  of  air  and  no  sensation  of  closeness 
should  be  perceptible  in  the  stable. 

Drainage  removes  the  liquid  refuse  from  the  stable  by  suitable 
gutters  and  drains.  It  cannot  do  this  unless  the  floor  is  water- 
tight, and  concrete  flooring  is  therefore  recommended.  Urine  leak- 
ing through  cracks  in  the  floor  until  the  soil  beneath  is  saturated  is 
a frequent  source  of  foul  odors  and  unhealthy  stables. 

Cleanliness. — Since  the  manure  of  tuberculous  cattle  often  con- 
tains living  tubercle  germs  in  vast  numbers,  the  importance  of  keep- 
ing it  well  cleaned  out  of  the  stable  is  readily  seen.  Such  manure 
is  not  only  dangerous  to  other  cattle  in  the  .stable,  but  may  be  the 
means  of  conveying  the  disease  to  children.  Often  cows  are  seen 
with  their  flanks  incrusted  with  dry  dung.  Parts  often  break  off 
while  the  cow  is  milked,  and  some  of  it  is  likely  to  fall  into  the 
milk  pail.  The  larger  lumps  are  strained  out,  but  the  smaller  par- 
ticles remain,  and  also  the  tubercle  germs,  which  are  small  enough 
to  pass  through  any  strainer.  These  stay  in  the  milk  and  make  it 
a fruitful  cause  of  the  disease  in  the  young. 

Stables  should  be  cleaned  out  often  and  the  manure  put  where  it 
cannot  be  picked  over  by  hogs  or  cattle.  These  animals  are  easily 
infected  in  that  way.  Cleanliness  also  includes  keeping  the  walls 
and  ceilings  free  from  dirt,  dust,  and  cobwebs.  These  are  all  good 
resting  places  for  disease  germs. 

Whitewashing  the  interior  of  the  Stable  at  least  twice  a year  is 
a great  aid  to  cleanliness,  and  also  has  a distinct  effect  in  destroying 
disease  germs.  In  many  municipalities  dairy  stables  are  required  to 
be  whitewashed  at  regular  intervals,  and  it  is  a practice  that  should 
be  universal. 


22 


Members  of  the  International  Commission  on  the  Control  of  Bovine 

Tuberculosis 

J.  G.  Rutherford,  C.M.G.,  V.S.,  H.A.R.C.V.S.,  Veterinary  Director  Gen- 
eral and  Live  Stock  Commissioner  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada, 
Ottawa,  Canada;  Chairman. 

M.  H.  Reynolds,  D.V.M.,  Professor  of  Veterinary  Science,  College  of 
Agriculture  and  Experiment  Station,  University  of  Minnesota, 
St.  Anthony  Park,  St.  Paul,  Minn. ; Secretary. 

Hon.  W.  C.  Edwards,  Senator,  Canadian  Parliament,  Ottawa,  Canada. 

J.  J.  Ferguson,  B.S.A.,  head  of  the  Animal  Foods  Branch,  Swift  & 
Co.,  Chicago,  111. 

J.  W.  Flavelle,  LL.B.,  Governor,  University  of  Toronto;  President, 
William  Davies  Packing  Co. ; Toronto,  Canada. 

Hon.  W.  D.  Hoard,  ex-Governor  of  Wisconsin;  Editor  of  Hoard’s 
Dairyman;  Fort  Atkinson,  Wis. 

Charles  A.  Hodgetts,  M.D.,  C.M.,  L.R.C.P.,  Chief  Medical  Adviser, 
Commission  on  Conservation  for  Canada,  Ottawa,  Canada. 

J.  N.  Hurty,  M.D.,  Secretary,  State  Board  of  Health  of  Indiana,  In- 
dianapolis, Ind.  ^ 

John  R.  Mohler,  A.M.,  V.M.D.,  Chief  of  the  Pathological  Division, 
Bureau  of  Animal  Industry,  United  States  Department  of  Agri- 
culture, Washington,  D.  C. 

Veranus  A.  Moore,  B.S.,  M.D.,  Director  of  the  New  York  State  Veter- 
inary College,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 

Mazyck  P.  Ravenel,  M.D.,  Professor  of  Bacteriology  University  of 
Wisconsin,  Madison,  Wis. 

E.  C.  Schroeder,  M.D.V.,  Superintendent  of  Experiment  Station,  Bureau 
of  Animal  Industry,  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture, 
Bethesda,  Md. 

T.  W.  Tomlinson,  Secretary,  American  National  Live  Stock  Associa- 
tion, Denver,  Col. 

* Frederick  Torrance,  B.A.,  D.V.S.,  Director  of  the  Faculty  of  Compara- 
tive Medicine,  University  of  Manitoba,  Winnipeg,  Canada. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  MAFLCH,  1912 


CIRCULAR  NO.  159 


TESTS  OF  LIME  SULFUR, 
BORDEAUX  MIXTURE  AND  OTHER  SPRAYS 


By  0.  S.  Watkins 
Associate  in  Horticultural  Chemistry 


CONTENTS 


Introduction ...  

Method  of  Obtaining  Records 

Weather  Conditions 

Spray  Dates 

Lime  Sulfur  versus  Bordeaux  Mixture — . . . . 

Tests  in  1910 

Effect  on  Foliage . 

Effect  on  Fruit , 

Table  1 

Tests  in  1911 — 

Effect  on  Foliage.  ....  ! 

Effect  on  Fruit ..  . . . . 

Table  2.. . ... 

Substitution  of  Lime  Sulfur  for  Bordeaux  Mixture  in  One  or  Two  of 

the  Three  Applications 

Effect  on  Foliage 

Effect  on  Fruit 

Table  3 

Attempts  to  Reduce  the  Injury  Following  the  Use  of  Bordeaux  Mix- 
ture   . '. 

Tests  in  1910 

Effect  on  Foliage 

Effect  on  Fruit 

Table  4 

Tests  in  1911 

Table  5 

Lime  Sulfur  Used  at  Various  Strengths 

Table  6 

Tests  of  Commercial  Brands  of  Arsenate  of  Lead  

Table  7 

Tests  in  1910 

Arsenates  of  Lead  with  Bordeaux  Mixture 

Table  8 

Arsenates  of  Lead  with  Lime  Sulfur 

Table  9 

Tests  in  1911 

Arsenates  of  Lead  with  Bordeaux  Mixture  

Table  10 

Arsenates  of  Lead  with  Lime  Sulfur 

Table  11 

.Certain  new  Fungicides  and  Insecticides 

Effect  on  Foliage 

Effect  on  Fruit 

Table  12 

Summary 


3 

3 

5 

0 

6 

6 

/ 

8 

9 

9 

10 

11 

11 

14 

15 

15 

15 

17 

17 

17 

18 

18 

19 

20 

20 

21 

22 

99 

23 

23 

24 

24 

25 

27 

27 

27 

28 

29 

30 

30 

31 

32 

33 


TESTS  OF  LIME  SULFUR,  BORDEAUX  MIXTURE 
AND  OTHER  SPRAYS 


INTRODUCTION 

Among  Ihe  problems  with  which  the  apple  grower  of  today  is 
confronted  is  the  protection  of  the  trees  and  fruit  from  the 
ravages  of  insect  pests  and  fungous  diseases.  In  order  to  be  able 
to  assist  the  growers  of  Illinois  in  the  proper  selection  and  appli- 
cation of  spray  mixtures,  the  Illinois  Agricultural  Experiment 
Station  has  carried  on  spraying  experiments  for  a number  of 
years.  During  the  summers  of  1910  and  1911  experiments  were 
undertaken  at  Neoga,  Illinois,  the  chief  lines  of  work  being  tests  to 
determine  (1)  the  relative  efficiency  of  lime  sulfur  mixtures  and 
Bordeaux  mixture ; (2)  the  comparative  value  of  different  com- 
mercial brands  of  arsenate  of  lead;  and  (3)  the  value  of  certain 
new  fungicides  and  insecticides. 

The  orchard  used  for  these  experiments  is  owned  by  H.  A. 
Aldrich  and  Company  of  Neoga,  and  is  situated  two  miles  south- 
west of  town.  It  consisted  of  300  fifteen-year-old  Ben  Davis 
trees.  The  orchard  was  divided  into  plats  of  four  to  six  trees 
each,  and  the  various  plats  sprayed  differently.  Scattered 
thruout  the  orchard  check  trees  were  left  which  received  no 
treatment,  with  which  tlo  compare  the  sprayed  trees.  Problems 
of  a similar  nature  were  grouped  together  and  in  no  group  were 
there  more  trees  than  could  be  sprayed  in  a single  day.  Owing  to 
the  large  number  of  different  sprays  which  were  used,  and  the 
small  amount  of  each  which  was  required,  the  material  was 
applied  by  means  of  a barrel  pump  at  100  to  125  pounds 
pressure. 

Method  of  Obtaining  Records 

Foliage  notes  were  taken  from  time  to  time  thruout  the 
entire  season  and  the  windfalls  picked  up,  counted  and  examined. 
All  fruit  upon  the  trees  at  picking  time  was  gathered,  counted, 
weighed,  and  a definite  number  from  each  plat  examined.  In 
1910  practically  the  entire  crop  of  fruit  was  examined  but 
owing  to  the  abundant  yield  of  1911  it  was  impossible  to 
examine  the  whole  crop.  In  selecting  the  samples  for  examina- 
tion, care  was  taken  to  secure  apples  which  would  show  Ihe  (rue 
value  of  the  treatment  given.  A representative  tree  in  each  plat 
was  chosen,  and  all  the  apples  on  a certain  porlion  of  it 


4 


Fig.  1 — A Well  Sprayed  Orchard,  September  1.  1910 


Fig.  2 — A Neglected  Orchard  Adjoining  the  Orchard 
Shown  in  Fig.  1,  September  1,  1910 


5 


including  those  on  the  lowest  and  uppermost  branches  and  those 
on  the  outermost  and  innermost  branches  of  the  tree,  were 
picked  and  placed  on  the  sorting  table.  From  these,  two  samples 
of  100  each  were  chosen  and  examined  separately  and  the 
records  compared.  In  case  the  records  were  not  approxi- 
mately the  same  another  sample  of  100  apples  was  selected  and 
examined,  and  this  process  was  repeated  until  records  were 
obtained  upon  an  average  sample.  The  results  recorded  are  the 
average  of  all  samples  examined.  In  examining  the  apples 
for  blemishes,  a record  was  kept  of  all  markings,  however  small, 
altho  in  grading  the  standard  adopted  by  the  Illinois  State 
Horticultural  Society  was  adhered  to.*  The  grade  records  were 
taken  from  the  samples  examined  and  the  percentages  are  based 
on  the  number  of  apples  in  each  grade.  This  makes  the  percent- 
age of  Number  twos  and  culls  somewhat  larger  than  would 
be  the  case  had  the  grading  been  in  terms  of  bushels. 

Weather  Conditions 

The  season  of  1910  was  quite  abnormal.  March  was  a warm 
month,  and  as  a result  the  trees  came  into  bloom  early  in  April,  at 
least  a month  before  the  average  normal  blooming  date.  There 
was  a very  heavy  bloom  and  an  excellent  set  of  fruit  which  had 
reached  the  size  of  hazel-nuts  by  April  23,  at  which  time  many 
of  the  small  apples  were  frozen.  Perhaps  15  to  20  percent  of 
the  crop  in  the  experimental  orchard  survived  the  cold.  The 
season  was  normal  as  regards  rainfall,  seldom  more  than  ten 
days  intervening  between  rains  of  one-half  inch  or  more.  The 
infection  of  apple  scab  could  not  have  been  worse,  altho  the 
fungus  did  not  appear  until  about  the  middle  of  May,  when  the 
apples  were  the  size  of  hickory  nuts.  There  was  also  an  abundance 
of  insects.  Neighboring:  orchards  which  received  no  care  pro- 
duced no  fruit  and  were  defoliated  before  the  first  of  September. 

The  conditions  of  1911  were  abnormal  as  regards  rainfall. 
The  summer  was  exceptionally  dry,  very  little  rain  falling 
between  the  middle  of  June  and  the  first  of  September ; while  both 

* For  Ben  Davis,  a No.  1 apple  shall  not  be  less  than  2 Vo  inches  in  diam- 
eter, shall  be  practically  free  from  action  of  worms,  or  not  over  10  per- 
cent of  the  apples  affected  by  scab  or  other  defacement  of  surface;  shall 
be  handpicked  from  the  trees  and  not  bruised  or  skin-broken;  shall  be  of 
a bright  and  normal  color  and  shapely  formed.  No.  2.  apples  may  be  2% 
inches  in  diameter,  and  not  over  20  percent  of  the  apples  affected  by 
defacement  of  surface  by  dry  rot,  scab,  worms,  or  other  defects ;shall  be 
hand-picked  from  the  trees  and  not  bruised  or  skin-broken;  shall  be  of  a 
bright  and  normal  color  and  shapely  formed.  Adopted  December  17, 1903. 


6 


September  and  October  were  wet  months.  The  trees  came  into 
bloom  early  in  May,  and  during  most  of  the  blooming  period 
there  was  a cold  rain  which  continued  for  several  days.  In 
spite  of  these  conditions,  unfavorable  as  they  were  for  polli- 
nation, there  was  a good  set  of  fruit.  The  injury  caused  by 
insects  was  very  slight,  and  the  only  serious  infection  of  scab 
came  during  the  blooming  period.  The  foliage  and  fruit  on 
neighboring  unsprayed  orchards  did  not  fall  prematurely,  as  was 
the  case  in  1910,  and  at  the  close  of  the  season  the  check  trees 
in  the  experimental  orchard  were  as  healthy  in  appearance  as 
the  sprayed  trees. 

Spray  Dates 

In  1910  the  entire  orchard  received  a winter  application  of 
lime  sulfur  the  latter  part  of  March,  just  as  the  buds  were 
beginning  to  swell;  and  from  one  to  six  summer  applications 
were  made  upon  or  near  the  following  dates: 

1.  April  7 4.  May  27 

2.  April  2(5  5.  June  21 

3.  May  10  6.  July  22 

In  1911  a winter  application  of  lime  sulfur  was  given  the 
entire  orchard  about  the  middle  of  April;  and  from  one  to  five 
summer  applications  were  made  upon  or  near  the  following 
dates : 

1.  April  20  4.  June  23 

2.  May  18  5.  August  15 

3.  June  3 

LIME  SULFUR  VERSUS  RORDEAUX  MIXTURE 

During  the  last  few  years  lime  sulfur  has  been  attracting 
attention  as  a fungicide  for  the  summer  treatment  of  apples.  To 
determine  the  adaptibility  of  this  spray  for  Illinois  orchards,  the 
following  experiments  were  planned  and  carried  out. 

Tests  in  1910 

Plat  A.  Homemade  lime  sulfur. — This  was  made  by  boiling  together 
until  all  the  sulfur  was  in  solution,  10  pounds  of  lime,  20  pounds  of  sul- 
fur, and  about  15  gallons  of  water.  This  solution  was  diluted  so  that  in 
each  50  gallons  of  the  spray  there  were  four  pounds  of  sulfur  in  solu- 
tion.* This  material  was  made  up  immediately  before  each  application. 

Plat  B.  Home  concentrated  lime  sulfur. — This  was  made  by  boiling 
together  until  all  the  sulfur  was  in  solution,  50  pounds  of  lime,  100 
pounds  of  sulfur,  and  (50  gallons  of  water.  This  solution  was  diluted  so 
that  in  each  50  gallons  of  the  spray  there  were  4 pounds  of  sulfur  in 


* Based  on  analyses  of  similarly  made  solutions. 


7 


solution.*  This  material  was  prepared  early  in  the  season  and  kept  as  a 
stock  solution,  some  of  it  being  used  for  each  application.  The  records 
obtained  upon  the  fruit  in  these  plats  were  to  be  compared  with  those 
obtained  upon  the  fruit  in  the  A plats,  to  determine  whether  or  not  there 
was  any  deterioration  of  the  home  concentrated  lime  sulfur  solution  upon 
standing. 

Plat  C.  Self-boiled  lime  and  sulfur. — This  was  made  from  32  pounds 
of  lime,  32  pounds  of  sulfur,  and  200  gallons  of  water.  The  preparation 
of  this  spray  differs  from  that  used  on  plats  A and  B,  as  the  only  heat 
used  to  cook  it  is  that  which  is  furnished  by  the  slaking  lime. 

Plat  D.  Commercial  lime  sulfur.— This  was  a clear  solution  and  was 
diluted  so  that  each  50  gallons  of  the  spray  contained  4 pounds  of  sulfur 
in  solution.* 

Plat  E.  Standard  Bordeaux  Mixture. — This  was  made  from  4 pounds 
of  copper  sulfate,  4 pounds  of  lime,  and  50  gallons  of  water. 

For  the  control  of  chewing  insects  arsenate  of  lead  was 
added  to  each  of  the  above  mixtures  at  Ihe  rate  of  2 pounds  per 
50  gallons  of  spray. 

In  Ihis  group  each  plat,  A,  B,  G,  D and  E,  consisted  of  10 
trees,  which  were  subdivided  into  plats  of  four  trees  each.  These 
subplats  were  designated  A4,-  A2,  A3,  A4,  B4,  B2,  etc.  A4.  B4,  C]7  D1? 
and  E]  each  received  three  applications;  A2,  B2,  C2,  D2  and  E2, 
four  applications;  A3,  B3,  C3,  D3  and  E3,  five  applications;  A4,  B4, 
C4,  D4  and  E4,  six  applications. 

Effect  on  Foliage 

The  first,  infection  of  scab  did  not  occur  until  several  days 
after  the  third  application  had  been  made,  so  that  the  early 
effects  of  the  first  three  applications  were  quite  similar.  Shortly 
after  the  third  application  had  been  made,  there  was  considerable 
rain,  which  washed  off  much  of  the  spray,  and  ati  the  same  time 
afforded  excellent  conditions  for  the  germination  of  scab  spores. 
At  the  time  the  scab  appeared  there  was  very  little  spray  mate- 
rial visible  upon  any  of  the  trees  which  had  been  sprayed  with 
the  lime  sulfur  mixtures,  while  there  was  a large  amount  visible 
on  the  trees  in  Plat  E,  which  had  received  the  Bordeaux  mix- 
ture. Plals  A,  B,  G and  D were  almost  as  badly  infected  with 
scab  as  were  the  check  trees,  which  had  received  no  spray,  hut 
plat  E showed  very  little  scab. 

With  the  exception  of  the  self-boiled  lime  and  sulfur,  the 
later  applications  of  the  lime  sulfur  sprays  checked  to  a consid- 
erable extent  the  work  of  the  scab,  but  at  the  same  time  caused 
much  foliage  injury.  The  injury  was  along  the  edges  and  at  the 
tips  of  the  leaves  and  in  the  scab  spots,  and  the  later  the  application 
the  more  severe  was  the  injury.  The  influence  of  the  self-boiled 


* Based  on  analyses  of  solutions  used. 


8 


lime  and  sulfur  in  the  control  of  scab  was  very  temporary ; how- 
ever, no  spray  injury  followed  its  use.  The  Bordeaux  mixture 
proved  very  adhesive,  controlled  the  scab  almost  perfectly  and 
caused  very  little  foliage  injury.  Of  these  five  sprays,  Bordeaux 
mixture  proved  the  most  efficient  in  protecting  the  foliage  from 
scab,  and  self-boiled  lime  and  sulfur  the  least  effective.  All  of 
the  cooked  lime  sulfur  sprays  possessed  considerable  fungicidal 
value,  but  because  of  their  lack  of  adhesiveness  their  action  was 
only  temporary. 

In  spite  of  the  fact  that  self-boiled  lime  and  sulfur  possesses 
very  little  fungicidal  value  in  the  control  of  apple  scab,  special 
attention  must  be  called  to  the  plats  sprayed  with  this  material, 
since  the  general  appearance  of  the  trees  at  a distance  was  much 
better  than  that  of  any  of  the  others  in  this  experiment,  owing 
to  the  large  size,  dark  color  and  abundance  of  foliage.  ' These 
trees  did  not  suffer  so  severely  from  the  freeze  as  did  the  others, 
since  the  application  of  lime  and  .sulfur  made  April  22  formed  a 
coating  over  the  fruit  and  foliage  which  acted  in  some  way  as  a 
shield  against  the  cold. 

Effect  on  Fruit 

All  plats  had  some  fruit  survive  the  freeze  of  April  23 
excepting  plat  E,  upon  which  Bordeaux  mixture  had  been  used. 
These  trees  were  situated  in  the  western  part  of  the  orchard, 
adjoining  an  open  field,  and  only  a very  few  apples  escaped 
being  frozen. 

The  following  table  shows  the  relative  fungicidal  value  of  the 
different  lime  sulfur  sprays  in  the  control  of  scab  on  the  fruit,  and 
also  the  benefits  derived  from  three,  four,  five  and  six  applica- 
tions. These  results  fully  corroborate  those  secured  upon  the 
foliage  as  stated  above.  Unfortunately  there  were  no  Bordeaux 
sprayed  apples  directly  comparable  with  these,  but-judging  from 
the  effect  upon  the  foliage  much  less  scab  might  have  been 
expected  upon  the  fruit.  The  apples  from  the  B plats  (sprayed 
with  home  concentrated  lime  sulfur)  showed  somewhat  less 
scab  than  those  from  the' other  plats,  but  even  upon  these  the 
amount  of  scab  was  exceptionally  large.  It  must  be  understood, 
however,  that  the  infection  of  scab  could  not  have  been  worse, 
for  check  trees  which  received  no  spray  yielded  no  sound  fruit 
and  lost  their  foliage  early  in  September.  In  order  to  have  any. 
picked  fruit  for  examination  from  the  unsprayed  trees,  it  was 
necessary  to  gather  it  three  or  four  weeks  before  the  fruit  on  the 
sprayed  trees  was  ready  to  harvest.  At  that  time  many  of  the 
apples  were  rotting  on  those  trees,  and  nearly  all  of  them  were 


Table  1. — Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  from  Trees  Sprayed 
with  Lime  Sulfur  Mixtures,  1910 


Plat 

Treatment 

Applica- 

tions 

made 

Total 

No. 

ap- 

ples 

Per 

cent 

scab 

Per 

cent 

cur- 

culio 

Per 

cent 

cod^ 

ling 

moth 

Percent 

russet 

Ai 
. A2 
A3 
A4 

Bi 

b2 

b3 

b4 

Cl 

C2 

C3 

C4 

Di 

D2 

d3 

d4 

Check 

10-20-13  lime  sulfur  di- 
luted 1 in  18  with  2-50 
arsenate  of  lead 

50-100-50  lime  sulfur  di- 
luted 1 in  28  with  2-50 
arsenate  of  lead 

32-32-200  self-boiled 
lime  and  sulfur  with 
2-50  arsenate  of  lead 

Commercial  lime  sulfur 
diluted  1 in  35  with 
2-50  arsenate  of  lead 

No  treatment 

1,2,3 
1,2, 3, 4, 
1,2, 3, 4, 5 
1,2,3, 4, 5, a 

1,2,3 
1,2, 3, 4 
1,2, 3,4, 5 
1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6 

1,2,3 
1,2, 3, 4 
1,2, 3, 4, 5 
1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6 

1,2,3 
1,2, 3, 4 
1,2, 3, 4, 5 
1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6 

None 

139 
33 
42 
77 

96 

140 
237 
140 

438 

323 

510 

660 

343 

160 

127 

203 

210 

94 

81 

60 

32 

68 

39 

45 

15 

98 

96 

98 

00 

87 

73 

55 

60 

100 

16 

24 

17 

24 

25 

15 

19 

15 

38 

16 
16 
29 

26 
32 
22 
35 

100 

3.6 

3.0 

2.5 

2.6 

4.0 
2.8 

4.0 
2.7 

8.0 
0 

2.0 

4.0 

1.0 
5.0 
0 

3.5 

28.0 

13 

18 

10 

5 

13 
15 

14 

7 

8 
10 

6 

19 

10 

8 

9 

10 

20 

deformed  and  undersized.  Much  of  the  injury  as  shown  by  the 
russet  column  was  no  doubt  caused  by  the  cold  weather.  An 
examination  of  the  codling  moth  injuries  shows  that  the  action 
of  the  arsenate  of  lead  in  the  control  of  this  insect  was  about 
the  same  when  used  in  any  of  the  four  sprays. 

It  must,  be  concluded  from  these  data  that  none  of  the  lime 
sulfur  sprays  are  efficient  fungicides  in  the  control  of  apple 
scab  in  seasons  when  there  are  severe  attacks.  If  the  danger  of 
spray  injury  could  be  eliminated,  any  of  the  cooked  solutions 
might  prove  efficient  when  only  light  attacks  of  scab  are  exper- 
ienced. Under  no  conditions  would  it  seem  wise  to  use  self- 
boiled  lime  and  sulfur  for  diseases  of  the  apple. 

Tests  in  1911 

From  the  experiments  in  1910  it  was  learned  that  self-boiled 
lime  and  sulfur  would  not  control  apple  scab,  and  also  that  the 
home  concentrated  solution  was  as  efficient  as  the  ordinary 
homemade;  so  it  was  deemed  unnecessary  to  repeat  the  treat- 
ments given  plats  A and  G in  1910.  Treatments  tested  in  1911 
were  therefore  as  follows: 


10 


A.  Home  concentrated  lime  sulfur  solution.  — This  was  made  from  50 
pounds  of  lime,  100  pounds  of  sulfur,  and  sufficient  water  to  bring  the 
final  volume  of  the  solution  to  66  gallons.  This  was  diluted  so  that  each 
50  gallons  of  the  spray  contained  4 pounds  of  sulfur  in  solution.1 

B.  Commercial  lime  sulfur  solution. — This  was  a clear  solution  and 
was  diluted  so. that  each  50  gallons  of  the  spray  contained  4 pounds  of 
sulfur  in  solution1. 

C.  Standard  Bordeaux  mixture. — This  was  made  from  4 pounds  of 
copper  sulfate,  4 pounds  of  lime  and  50  gallons  of  water. 

In  this  group  each  plat  consisted  of  16  trees,  and  was  sub- 
divided into  plats  of  four  trees  each.  These  subplats  were  desig- 
nated Ax,  A2,  A8,  A4,  Bj,  Bo,  etc.  It  was  the  original  intention  to 
give  Al7  Bj  and  C4,  three  applications;  A2,  B2  and  C2,  four  appli- 
cations; A8,  B3  and  C3,  five  applications;  and  A4,  B4  and  C4,  six 
applications ; the  plan  was  changed,  however,  so  that  Ax,  A2,  Bb 
B2,  C4  and  C2  each  received  three  applications ; A8,  B3  and  C8,  four 
applications;  A4,  B4  and  C4,  five  applications. 

Effect  on  Foliage 

The  only  serious  infection  of  scab  came  before  many  of  the 
leaves  were  out,  and  as  the  amount  was  small  in  all  cases  it 
was  impossible  to  detect  any  difference  between  the  three  plats. 
This  lack  of  scab  no  doubt  reduced  the  amount  of  foliage  injury 
caused  by  the  spray,  as  infected  leaves  are  the  first  to  turn 
brown  when  spray  is  applied2.  At  no  time  during  the  season 
did  any  yellow  leaves  appear  upon  the  trees  sprayed  with  Bor- 
deaux mixture.  The  first  two  applications  of  lime  sulfur  to 
plats  A and  B caused  no  injury  whatever,  and  the  amount  fol- 
lowing the  third  application  was  very  small.  The  fourth  appli- 
cation burned  about  30  percent  of  the  leaves  at  the  tips  and 
along  the  edges,  and  the  fifth  application  affected  about  50  per- 
cent in  the  same  way.  The  injury  was  more  severe  in  plat  B. 
upon  which  the  commercial  lime  sulfur  had  been  used,  than 
upon  plat  A,  which  had  received  the  home  concentrated  solution ; 
but  in  each  case  the  trees  rapidly  recovered.  The  adhesiveness 
of  the  Bordeaux  mixture  was  much  better  than  that  of  either  of 
the  lime  sulfur  sprays,  and  the  amount  of  spray  injury  caused  by  it 
was  negligible. 


mased  on  analyses  of  similarly  made  solutions. 

2C.  S.  Crandall.  Illinois  Agricultural  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  135.  page  225  (1909). 


11 


Effect  on  Fruit 

The  fruit  in  these  plats  was  picked  October  16  and  1/.  and 
examined,  with  the  following  results: 


Table  2. — Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  from  Trees  Sprayed  with 
Lime  Sulfur  and  Bordeaux  Mixture,  1911 


Apples 

cS 

O 

C-t 

CD 

« 

1 

Plat 

Treatment 

Appli- 

cations 

Total 

No. 

To- 

tal 

bu. 

Per- 

cent 

CO 

C) 

9 co 

— CO 

C ci 
P 3 

rt  .q 

made 

1 

9 

CO 

3 

5 

Ck 

a>  -2 

5 

n 

— 

<D 

Ai,  A2 

50-100-66  lime  sulfur 

1,2,3 

7080 

33 1 

58 

24 

18 

51 

41 

3 

0 

A3 

i diluted  1 — 18  with 

1,2, 3, 4 

1050 

5 

63 

27 

10 

44 

23 

1 

9 

A* 

2-50  arsenate  of  lead 

1,2, 3, 4, 5 

5605 

25f 

73 

21 

6 

31 

3 

5 

7 

Bi,  B2 

Commercial  lime  sul- 

1,2,3 

8456 

35  ! 

66 

26 

8 

39 

34 

1 

7 

b3 

fur  diluted  1-35 

1,2, 3, 4 

1931 

^ t 

78 

18 

4 

28 

9 

0 

7 

b4 

1 with  2-50  arsenate  of 
lead 

1,2, 3, 4, 5 

6770 

29| 

72 

24 

4 

33 

31 

9 

Ci,  C2 

1 1 - 4-50  Bordeaux  mix- 

1,2,3 

12540 

58* 

78 

17 

5 

25 

7 

1 

0 

c3 

1 ture  with  2-50 

1 ,2,3,4 

4664 

22{ 

86 

11 

3 

25 

0 

6 

0 

C4 

arsenate  of  lead 

1,2, 3, 4, 5 

4320 

m 

79 

19 

2 

15 

0 

4 

0 

Check 

|No  treatment 

2532 

8* 

1 

11 

54 

35 

76 

100 

0 

0 

This  table  shows  the  relative  efficiency  of  the  different  mix- 
tures, and  the  value  of  three,  four  and  five  applications.  Since 
the  object  of  this  experiment  was  to  determine  the  comparative 
value  of  the  different  mixtures  for  the  prevention  of  apple  scab, 
special  attention  should  be  given  to  the  scab  column  in  this 
table.  The  Bordeaux  mixture  used  on  plat  G gave  the  best 
result,  with  commercial  lime  sulfur  as  used  on  plat  B somewhat 
better  than  the  home  concentrated  solution  used  on  plat  A.  The 
fifth  application  with  commercial  lime  sulfur  appears  to  have 
been  of  no  value  whatever,  for  the  scab  and  other  fungous 
attacks  were  more  severe  than  when  only  four  applications  were 
made.  This  was  a year  in  which  there  was  very  little  russeting 
of  fruit,  but  this  was  to  be  expected,  since  there  was  so 
litjtle  injury  from  insects  and  fungous  diseases,  which  are  largely 
responsible  for  much  of  the  spray  injury.  The  “burn”  recprded 
in  the  last  column  was  an  injury  caused  by  lime  sulfur-arsenate, 
and  upon  specimens  so  affected  was  quite  serious.  The  “burn” 
appeared  as  dark  brown  sunken  areas,  usually  circular  in 


* ‘Other  fungi"  consisted  chiefly  of  fly  speck  and  sooty  blotch. 


12 


13 


Fig.  i — Grading  of  Apples  from  Plat  B4,  Sprayed  Five  Times  with 
Lime  Sulfur-arsenate,  1911 


Fig.  5 — Grading  of  Apples  from  Plat  C4,  Sprayed  Five  Times  with 
Bordeaux-arsenate,  1911 


shape,  Ihe  tissue  being  tough  and  leathery,  which  made  the 
injury  readily  distinguishable  from  ordinary  sunscald.  As  the 
apples  increased  in  size  the  “burned”  part  had  a tendency  to 
split  away  from  the  remainder  of  the  apple,  and  it  sometimes 
sloughed  off  entirely.  In  such  cases,  a russeted  scar  remained, 
which  somewhat  healed  over  as  the  season  advanced.  This 
injury  was  more  severe  upon  trees  sprayed  with  commercial 
lime  sulfur  than  those  receiving  the  home  concentrated  solution. 
This  “burn”  is  quite  different  from  anything  previously  reported, 
and  differs  from  the  lime  sulfur  injury  on  the  foliage  which 
always  appears  very  shortly  after  application,  in  that  it  was  not 
apparent  until  about  ten  days  after  any  application  had  been 


14 


made.  Between  the  time  of  application  and  Ihe  first  appearance 
of  the  injury  there  intervened  several  very  hot  days.  There  was 
only  a trace  of  rain  in  that  time,  but  upon  several  mornings  there 
were  very  heavy  dews.  After  the  injury  first  appeared  it  devel- 
oped very  rapidly,  sometimes  affecting  almost  the  entire  apple. 
The  third  application,  made  about  the  first  of  June,  was 
responsible  for  most  of  the  injury. 

The  variation  shown  in  the  grade  columns  in  Table  2 is  suffi- 
cient to  attract;  attention,  as  the  percentage  of  Number  1 apples 
in  the  G plats  (sprayed  with  Bordeaux  mixture)  is  considerably 
greater  than  in  either  of  the  others.  The  apples  picked  from 
the  check  tree  were  exceptionally  good  for  unsprayed  apples  and 
were  harvested  at  Ihe  regular  time.  This  is  rather  uncommon, 
as  usually  by  picking  time  most  of  the  fruit  in  untreated  plats 
has  either  fallen  or  has  rotted  on  the  trees.  One  thing  notice- 
able which  the  table  does  not  show  was  the  variation  in  color 
between  the  fruit  harvested  from  the  different  plats.  The 
apples  which  had  been  sprayed  with  Bordeaux  mixture  were 
much  better  colored  than  Ihose  which  had  received  the  lime 
sulfur  sprays. 

SUBSTITUTION  OF  LIME  SULFUR  FOR  BORDEAUX  MIX- 
TURE IN  ONE  OR  TWO  OF  THE  THREE 
APPLICATIONS 

The  experiments  thus  far  considered  have  definitely  shown 
that  Bordeaux  mixture  for  use  as  a fungicide  upon  appies  is 
much  superior  to  any  of  the  lime  sulfur  sprays.  However, 
since  applications  of  Bordeaux  mixture  are  occasionally  fol- 
lowed by  a russetmg  of  the  fruit  and  a premature  defoliation, 
it  has  failed  to  prove  itself  an  ideal  spray.  Lime  sulfur  has 
been  shown  to  possess  certain  fungicidal  properties.  Its  chief 
disadvantage,  aside  from  possible  injurious  effects,  is  its  lack  of 
adhesiveness.  In  order  to  see  if  it  would  be  possible  to  substi- 
tute lime  sulfur  for  one  or  more  of  the  regular  applications  of 
Bordeaux  mixture,  the  following  tests  were  made  in  1911  : 

Plat  21.  Lime  sulfur-arsenate,  1st,  2nd  and  3rd  applications 
Plat  22.  Lime  sulfur-arsenate,  1st  and  2nd,  Bordeaux-arsenate  3rd 
Plat  23.  Lime  sulfur-arsenate,  1st  and  3rd,  Bordeaux  arsenate  2nd 
Plat  21.  Bordeaux-arsenate,  1st  and  3rd,  lime  sulfur-arsenate  2nd 
Plat  25.  Bordeaux-arsenate,  1st,  lime  sulfur-arsenate,  2nd  and  3rd 
Plat  26.  Bordeaux-arsenate,  1st,  2nd  and  3rd  applications. 


15 


Effect  on  Foliage 

Very  little  information  was  to  be  gained  from  the  foliage 
notes,  as  the  amount  of  injury  of  all  kinds  was  quite  small  for 
all  plats.  Immediately  after  the  third  application  of  lime 
sulfur-arsenate  had  been  made,  the  trees  receiving  it  showed  a 
small  amount  of  injury,  hut  not  sufficient  to  be  considered 
serious.  This  application  was  made  June  3.  and  altho  the 
injury  to  the  foliage  was  very  slight,  a very  serious  “burning” 
of  the  fruit  developed  ten  days  later. 

Effect  on  Fruit 

The  fruit  on  these  plats  was  picked  and  examined  October 
17.  with  the  following  results: 


Table  3. — Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  from  Trees  Sprayed 
in  Various  Ways,  1911 


Cft 

G 

Apples 

a 

bo 

Treatment 

Applicatii 

made 

Percent 

eft 

-+j 

h->  G 

G G 

(X)  Vh 

G <D 

<D  eft 

C r* 
<D  - 

Plat 

Total 

No. 

Total 

bu. 

1 

2 

Gulls  1 

O) 

O 

o 
n . 

o „ 

Oh  — 

O eft 
2 

21 

Lime  sulfur-arsenate 

1,2,3 

3862 

18% 

50 

24 

26 

30 

5 

16 

14 

22 

Lime  sulfur-arsenate 
1 Bordeaux-arsenate 

1,2 

3 

4262 

21% 

78 

16 

6 

12 

1 

1 

0 

23 

Lime  sulfur-arsenate 
Bordeaux-arsenate 

1,  3 
2 

3243 

16 

61 

17 

9 9 

17 

5 

5 

2 1 

24 

Bordeaux-arsenate 
Lime  sulfur-arsenate 

1,  3 

9 

67  1 8 

25  T4 

82 

17 

1 

0 

0 

0 

25 

Bordeaux-arsenate 
Lime  sulfur-arsenate 

1 ' 

2,3 

8727 

36% 

59 

30 

11 

20 

19 

17 

19 

26 

Bordeaux-arsenate 

1,2.3 

9870 

37  y2 

71 

20 

9 

18 

0 

7 

0 

Check 

Vo  treatment 

1589 

6 

11 

42 

47 

85 

99 

0 

0 

This  experiment  shows  that  the  most  satisfactory  results 
were  secured  when  Bordeaux  mixture  was  used  for  the  first  and 
third  applications  and  lime  sulfur  for  the  second.  Under  this 
treatment  there  was  a very  low  percentage  of  scab,  no  spray 
injury  of  any  kind,  and  only  one  percent  of  the  apples  were 
culls.  The  fruit;  on  plat  22,  which  received  two  applications  of 
lime  sulfur  and  one  of  Bordeaux  mixture,  was  very  good  and  dif- 
fered only  slightly  from  that  picked  from  plat,  24.  It  is  doubt- 
ful. however,  if  this  latter  schedule  would  be  as  effective  during 
a season  when  there  was  a severe  infection  of  scab. 


16 


Fig.  6 — Grading  of  Apples: — A,  from  Plat  21,  Sprayed  Three  Times 
with  Lime  Sulfur-arsenate;  B,  from  Plat  24,  First  and  Third 
Applications,  Bordeaux-arsenate,  Second  Application  Lime 
Sulfur-arsenate;  C,  from  Plat  26,  Sprayed  Three  Times 
with  Bordeaux-arsenate 


17 


ATTEMPTS  TO  REDUCE  THE  INJURY  FOLLOWING  THE 
USE  OF  BORDEAUX  MIXTURE 


In  1905  the  Illinois  Agricultural  Experiment  Station  began 
an  investigation  to  determine  the  cause  of  Bordeaux  injury  and 
if  possible  find  a remedy  for  it.  Among  the  treatments  which 
gave  the  most  promise  of  reducing  this  injury  was  the  after 
spray  with  milk  of  lime;  that  is,  following  the  regular  Bordeaux 
application  as  soon  as  dry  with  an  application  of  lime’'. 

Tests  in  1910 

To  determine  if  this  could  be  accomplished  on  a commercial 
scale  the  following  experiment  was  carried  out  : 

Plat  11. — In  lieu  of  the  regular  sprayings  with  Bordeaux  mixture 
only  milk  of  lime  was  used  to  determine  the  effect  of  the  lime  alone. 

Plat  12a. — This  plat  received  three  applications  of  3-3-50  Bordeaux 
mixture,  and  each  application  as  soon  as  dry  was  followed  by  4-50  milk 
of  lime.  In  place  of  the  fourth  regular  spraying  with  Bordeaux  mixture 
milk  of  lime  was  substituted. 

Plat  12b. — This  plat  differed  from  12a  in  that  it  received  one  addi- 
tional application  of  Bordeaux  mixture  followed  with  milk  of  lime. 

Plat  13a  and  13b. — These  plats  were  treated  the  same  as  plats  1 2a 
and  12b,  respectively,  except  that  4-4-50  Bordeaux  mixture  was  used. 

Plat  14. — This  plat  received  the  first  three  regular  applications  of 
4-4-50  Bordeaux  mixture,  the  third  of  which  was  followed  by  milk  of 
lime. 

Plat  15. — This  plat  received  the  first  three  regular  applications  of 
4-4-50  Bordeaux  mixture. 

Plat  16. — To  this  plat  four  applications  of  4-4-50  Bordeaux  mixuue 
were  given,  the  second,  third  and  fourth  applications  being  followed  with 
4-50  milk  of  lime.  An  extra  application  of  4-50  milk  of  lime  was  given  four 
weeks  after  the  third  and  three  weeks  before  the  fourth  application  of 
Bordeaux  mixture. 

Plat  17. — This  plat  received  the  first  three  regular  applications  of 
3-3-50  Bordeaux  mixture. 

Arsenate  of  lead  was  used  with  the  Bordeaux  mixture,  2 pounds  to 
each  50  gallons. 

Effect  on  Foliage 

Early  in  the  season  plat  1 1 had  an  abundance  of  large  healthy 
foliage,  but  as  the  season  advanced  the  injuries  from  fungous 
diseases  and  insects  were  as  severe  as  upon  the  check  trees.  Plats 
12  and  13  were  in  excellenl  condition  thruout  the  entire  season. 
There  was  no  foliage  injury  of  any  kind,  and  the  applications 


*C.  S.  Crandall,  Illinois  Agricultural  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  135,  page  280,  (1909). 


18 


of  lime  materially  increased  Ihe  adhesiveness  of  the  Bordeaux 
mixture.  There  was  no  noticeable  difference  between  the  action 
of  4-4-5U  and  3-3-50  Bordeaux  mixture. 

Plats  14,  15  and  17  suffered  so  severely  from  the  freeze  that 
they  never  fully  recovered  from  the  effects  of  it.  The  amount  of 
scab  and  insect  i njury  was  quite  small  for  all  plats,  and  very  few 
yellow  leaves  appeared  on  any  of  them.  Plat  16  recovered  from 
Ihe  effects  of  the  freeze  quite  rapidly.  There  was  very  little  scab 
or  insect  injury.  These  trees  were  well  coated  with  the  spray 
material  at  the  time  of  the  freeze,  and  since  adjoining  trees  spray- 
ed only  with  Bordeaux  mixture  suffered  severely,  due  credit  must 
be  given  the  lime  for  the  part  it  played  in  shielding  these  trees. 

Effect  on  Fruit 

Those  trees  receiving  applications  of  lime  before  the  freeze 
had  considerable  fruit  which  escaped  being  frozen.  The  exami- 
nation of  this  fruit  gave  the  following  results: 


Table  4.— Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  from  Trees  Sprayed  with 
Bordeaux  Mixture  and  Milk  of  Lime,  1910 


Plat 

Treatment 

Applica- 

tions 

made 

Total  No. 
apples 

Percent 

scab 

Percent 

curculio 

Percent! 
codling  1 
moth 

Percent 

russet 

12a 

3-3-2-50  Bordeaux-arsenate 
Lime  used 

1,2,3 
1,2, 3, 4 

688 

5.3 

18.4 

1.5 

15.3 

12b 

3-3-2-50  Bordeaux-arsenate 
lame  used 

1,2, 3,-, 5 
1,2,3, 4,5 

530 

5.2 

16.7 

4.5 

15.2 

13a 

4-4-2-50  Bordeaux-arsenate 
Lime  used 

1 ^ 3 
1,2, 3, 4 

881 

2.0 

2.0 

1.0 

11.0 

13b 

4-4-2-50  Bordeaux-arsenate 
Lime  used 

1,2, 3,-, 5 
1,2,3, 4,5 

249 

0.0 

3.0 

0.7 

6.7 

16 

4-4-2-50  Bordeaux-arsenate 
Lime  used 

1,2, 3,-, 5 
2,3, 4, 5 

366 

6.0 

26.0 

6.0 

12.0 

17 

3-3-2-50  Bordeaux-arsenate 

1,2,3 

94 

5.2 

30.8 

6.3 

25.5 

It  will  be  seen  by  examining  the  “total  number  of  apples” 
column  and  comparing  the  plats  in  which  the  Bordeaux  mix- 
ture was  followed  by  the  milk  of  lime  with  plat  17,  in  which  only 
Bordeaux  mixture  was  used,  that  the  milk  of  lime  applications 
had  a decidedly  beneficial  effect  in  protecting  the  apples  from  the 
freeze.  There  is  also  no  doubt  but  that  the  after  spray  of  milk 
of  lime  prolongs  the  elliciency  of  the  Bordeaux-arsenate  by  in- 
creasing its  adhesiveness.  Altho  the  difference  in  the  percent  of 
soul)  betw  een  the  plats  sprayed  with  3-3-50  and  4-4-50  Bordeaux 


19 


mixture  as  used  in  plats  12  and  13  was  not  great,  there  was  a 
slight  advantage  in  favor  of  the  4-4-50  Bordeaux  mixture.  This 
was  also  true  in  regard  to  the  action  of  the  arsenate  of  lead  in  pre- 
venting curculio  and  codling  moth  injuries.  It  also  appeared  that 
the  after  spray  with  lime  had  a tendency  to  reduce  the  amount  of 
russeting.  as  in  all  plats  in  which  the  lime  was  used  the  amount 
of  russet  was  considerably  less  than  where  the  Bordeaux- 
nrsenate  alone  was  used.  However,  such  a conclusion  based 
upon  lliese  data  should  be  considered  tentative,  since  much  of  the 
russet  might  have  been  due  to  the  cold  weather. 

Tests  in  1911 

It  has  been  the  experience  of  some  growers  who  are  in  the 
habit  of  drenching  their  trees  when  spraying  with  Bordeaux 
mixture,  that  they  had  very  little  of  their  fruit  russeted.  To 
secure  data  on  this  a test  was  made  to  determine  the  difference 
in  the  amount  of  russet  caused  by  drenching  and  by  light  but 
thoro  applications.  Investigations*  have  also  shown  that  the 
most  severe  russeting  of  the  fruit  caused  by  Bordeaux  mixture 
is  the  result  of  the  applications  made  shortly  after  the  fall  of 
the  petals.  In  continuing  the  treatments  to  determine  the  best 
method  of  reducing  the  injury  following  the  use  of  Bordeaux 
mixture,  the  following  tests  were  made: 

Plat  34.  Bordeaux-arsenate  4-4-2-50,  drenched 

Plat  35.  Bordeaux-arsenate  4-4-2-50 

Plat  36.  Bordeaux-arsenate  4-4-2-50,  third  application  followed 
by  milk  of  lime 

Plat  37.  Bordeaux-arsenate  4-4-2-50,  second  application  follow- 
ed by  milk  of  lime. 

These  plats  were  each  given  the  first  three  regular  summer 
applications.  The  “2”  in  each  formula  stands  for  2 pounds  of 
arsenate  of  lead. 

The  fungous  and  insect  injuries  to  the  foliage  were  so  slight 
in  all  plats  that  no  differences  could  be  distinguished.  The  adhe- 
siveness of  the  mixture  applied  to  plat  34  was  much  more  marked 
than  that  applied  to  plat  35,  and  the  drenching  applications 
-seemed  to  exert  a stimulating  action.  The  foliage  in  plat  34  was 
extra  large,  vigorous,  and  of  a very  dark  green  color.  No  yellow 
leaf  appeared  on  plat  34.  and  only  about  five  percent  of  the 
leaves  on  plat  35  were  so  affected.  There  was  no  noticeable 

*U.  P.  Hedrick.  New  York  (Geneva)  Agricultural  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  287. 
page  163. 


difference  resulting  from  the  treatments  given  plats  36  and  37. 
as  the  general  appearance  of  both  was  the  same  thruout  the  entire 
season.  No  yellow  leaf  appeared  at  any  time  upon  either  plat. 


Table  5. — Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  from  Trees  Sprayed 
Differently  with  Bordeaux  Mixture,  1941 


Plat 

Treatment 

Appli- 

cations 

made 

Total 

No. 

App 
75  . 

O _Q 

le 

Per 

cent 

£2 

03 

CO 

© 

© 

o 

©73 

O ZT 
© ^ 

Percent 
codling  moth 

__2 

x> 

•> 

1 

X 

34 

Bordeaux-arsenate 

1,2,3, 

4085 

174 

78 

1 

20 

2 

14 

2 

18 

2 

drenched 

35 

Bordeaux-arsenate 

1,2,3, 

3640 

16f 

65 

27 

8 

26 

2 ■ 

12 

14 

30 

Bordeaux-arsenate 

1,2,3, 

5505 

20f 

80 

17 

3 

2 

5 

lime  after  3rd 

39 

37 

Bordeaux-arsenate 

1,2;  3, 

8985 

33i 

86 

13 

1 

32 

0 

1 

O; 

lime  after  2nd 

The  results  given  in  this  table  show  that  the  heavy  applica- 
tion of  Bordeaux-arsenate  was  much  preferable  to  the  usual 
lighter  application.  The  efficiency  of  the  mixture  was  not  only 
greater  in  controlling  scab,  but  the  amount  of  russeting  for 
which  the  spray  was  no  doubt  responsible  was  much  less.  The 
results  from  plats  36  and  37  seem  to  indicate  that  it  matters  very 
little  whether  the  lime  follows  the  second  or  third  application. 
The  apples  in  plat  37  graded  slightly  better  than  those  in  plat 
36.  Since  these  results  are  not  entirely  in  accord  with  those 
obtained  in  1910,  this  subject  needs  further  investigation. 

LIME  SULFUR  USED  AT  VARIOUS  STRENGTHS 

In  the  preceding  experiments,  where  lime  sulfur  has  been 
used,  the  solution  in  all  cases  was  one  in  which  there  were  4 
pounds  of  sulfur  in  solution  in  each  50  gallons  of  the  spray.  To 
determine  the  efficiency  and  safety  of  lime  sulfur  solutions  of 
varying  strengths,  the  following  experiment  was  carried  out  in 
1911.  Commercial  lime  sulfur  was  used. 

Plat  42.  1 gallon  lime  sulfur  to  50  gallons  of  water 

Plat  43.  1 gallon  lime  sulfur  to  40  gallons  of  water 

Plat  44.  1 gallon  lime  sulfur  to  20  gallons  of  water 

Plat  46.  1 gallon  lime  sulfur  to  30  gallons  of  water. 


21 


Arsenate  of  lead  was  added  to  each  at  the  rate  of  two  pounds 
to  50  gallons  of  the  spray.  Very  little  difference  was  noted  in 
the  foliage  in  the  different  plats.  In  each  case  there  was  a slight 
injury  following  the  third  application,  but  in  no  plat  did  it 
prove  permanent.  The  records  upon  the  fruit,  which  was 
picked  and  examined  October  13,  were  as  follows : 


Table  6. — Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  from  Trees  Sprayed  with 
Lime  Sulfur  of  Various  Strengths,  1911 


| 

Apples 

C3 

<v 

cr> 

P 

Plat 

Treatment 

Appli- 

cations 

made 

'Total  No. 

Per 

cent 

CJ 

C/j  j 

C £ 

cd  j-; 

GO 

■4-S 

75 

> 

o 

1 

9 

Gulls 

Percen 

|| 

<D 

o 

o 

tn 

CD 

Oh 

42 

1-50  lime  sulfur,  with 
2-50  arsenate 

1 . 2,  3 

1545 

6? 

70 

21 

9 

38 

43 

1 

1 

43 

1-40  lime  sulfur,  with 
2-50  arsenate 

1,  2,  3 

2585 

m 

56 

32 

12 

66 

10 

0 

0 

44 

1-20  lime  sulfur,  with 
2-50  arsenate 

1,  2,  3 

4767 

204 

63 

17 

20 

71 

8 

3 

2 

46 

1-30  lime  sulfur,  with 
2-50  arsenate 

1,  2,  3 

2544 

11 

66 

26 

8 

39 

34 

1 

7 

The  weakest  solution  used,  one  gallon  of  concentrated  solu- 
tion to  fifty  gallons  of  water,  which  gave  a spray  containing 
about  2%  pounds  of  sulfur  per  fifty  gallons,  seems  to  have  been 
the  proper  dilution  for  conditions  as  they  existed  during  1911. 
In  this  plat  there  were  not  only  fewer  scabby  apples,  but  a 
larger  percentage  of  Number  1 apples  than  is  credited  to  any 
other  plat.  One  thing  noticeable  was  the  small  amount  of  in- 
jury resulting  from  the  strong  solution  used  on  plat  44.  There 
were  in  each  fifty  gallons  of  this  spray  about  eight  pounds  of 
sulfur,  which  is  twice  the  amount  generally  considered  safe  for 
use  upon  apples.  To  determine  what  would  be  the  effect  of 
these  dilutions  in  seasons  of  more  abundant  rainfall  further 
investigations  are  necessary. 


22 


TESTS  OF  COMMERCIAL  BRANDS  OF  ARSENATE  OF  LEAD 

Arsenate  of  lead  has  been  one  of  the  leading  insecticides  for 
use  in  combating  chewing  insects  for  a number  of  years.  The 
last  few  years  twenty-five  or  more  commercial  manufacturers 
have  made  aud  offered  for  sale  prepared  arsenates  of  lead,  about 
which  many  requests  for  information  have  been  received.  The 
brands  which  were  found  upon  (he  market  in  this  state  in  Jan- 
uarv.  1910,  were  collected  and  analyzed,  with  the  following 
results : 


Table  7. — Results  of  Chemical  Analyses  of  Commercial  Arsenates 

of  Lead 


As  received 

Moisture  free 

i 

Moist- 

Leed 

Arsenic 

Lead 

Arsenic 

Soluble  ar- 

.Brand 

ure 

oxid 

oxid 

oxid 

oxid 

senic  oxid 

Sherwin-Williams... . 

48.18 

35.77 

12.76 

69.02 

24.62 

All  less 

Grasselli 

40.20 

39.52 

16.29 

66 . 08 

27.07 

than  % of 

Star 

40.20 

40.99 

16.95 

68.54 

28.34 

1 percent 

Niagara 

42.05 

38.42 

16.70 

66.29 

28.81 

Blanchard 

32.96 

43.05 

19.71 

64.21 

29.40 

Disparene 

51.08 

31.19 

14.97 

63.75 

30.60 

Swift 

45.56 

35.53 

17.04 

65.26 

31.31 

Hemingway 

39.05 

37.96 

19.15 

62.28 

31.41 

Rex 

46.41 

33.82. 

17.13 

63.10 

31.96 

Target 

41.50 

35.96 

18.93 

61.46 

32.35 

Eagle 

47.75 

34.12 

17.05 

65.30 

32.63 

Vreeland  

43.22 

35.53 

19.25 

62.57 

33.90 

Vreeland  powdered... 

Trace 

62.70 

33.76 

62.70 

33.76 

These  arsenates  were  purchased  directly  from  the  manufac- 
turers. and  were  all  received  in  the  form  of  pastes,  with  the 
exception  of  Vreeland’s  powdered.  An  exami  nation  of  the  above 
table  shows  considerable  variation  in  the  composition  of  the 
different  samples,  the  percentage  of  arsenic  oxid  ranging  from 
12.76  in  Sherwin-Williams  to  19.71  in  Blanchard,  and  the  lead 
oxid  from  31.19  in  Disparene  to  43.05  in  Blanchard.  The  amount 
of  soluble  arsenic  oxid  is  shown  to  be  quite  low  in  all  samples. 
Calculated  on  fhe  dry  basis  there  is  a variation  in  arsenic  oxid 
from  24.62  to  33.90%,  and  in  lead  oxid  from  61.46  to  69.02%- 
Chemically  speaking,  there  are  a number  of  different  arsenates 
of  lead,  but  there  are  only  two  which  are  used  commercially,*  the 


Bulletin  131 . Bureau  of  Chemistry,  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agriculture,  page  17. 


23 


tri-plumbic  arsenate,  represented  by  Pb3(As04)2,  and  commonly 
calledneutral  or  ortho  arsenate  of  lead,  and  plumbic  hydrogen 
arsenate  of  lead,  represented  by  PbHAs04,  and  commonly  called 
acid  arsenate  of  lead.  Most  of  the  above  samples  are  a mixture 
of  these  two;  in  some  the  neutral  predominates,  while  in  others 
there  is  more  of  the  acid.  Only  one,  Sherwin-Williams,  has  the 
arsenic  oxid  and  lead  oxid  in  the  proportions  to  form  the  tri- 
plumbic  arsenate.  As  arsenic  is  the  ingredient  present  in  arse- 
nate of  lead,  giving  to  it  its  value  as  an  insecticide,  the  above 
analyses  show  (hat  the  manufacturers,  as  a rule,  have  attempted 
to  put  out  products  containing  the  maximum  amount  of  arsenic. 

In  order  to  obtain  reliable  data  upon  the  comparative  values 
of  the  different  arsenates,  it  was  deemed  necessary  to  test  them 
in  the  field.  Since  it  was  impossible  to  try  all  of  those  which 
were  analyzed,  a few  representative  ones,  based  on  analyses,  were 
selected.  These  were  tested  in  two  groups,  one  in  which  they 
were  applied  with  Bordeaux  mixture,  and  a second  in  which  they 
were  applied  with  lime  sulfur  solution. 

Tests  in  1910 

Arsenates  of  Lead  with  Bordeaux  Mixture 

The  following  arsenates  of  lead  were  applied  with  4-4-50 
Bordeaux  mixture,  2 or  3 pounds  being  used  to  each  50  gallons' 
as  indicated : 


Plat  6.  Sherwin-Williams  paste  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  7.  Sherwin-Williams  paste  arsenate 3-50 

Plat  10.  Vreeland  powdered  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  14.  Grasselli  paste  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  20.  Grasselli  paste  arsenate  3-50 

Plat  21.  Lion  brand  paste  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  22.  Lion  brand  paste  arsenate 3-50 

Plat  23.  Vreeland  paste  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  24.  Vreeland  paste  arsenate 3-50 

Plat  25.  Hemingway  paste  arsenate  2-50 

Plat  26.  Hemingway  paste  arsenate 3-50 

Plat  27.  Star  brand  paste  arsenate  2-50 

Plat  28.  Star  brand  paste  arsenate 3-50 

Plat  29.  Eagle  brand  paste  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  30.  Eagle  b-and  paste  arsenate 3-50 


These  plats  all  suffered  quite  severely  from  the  freeze.  Owing 
to  a delay  in  the  receipt  of  Hemingway  and  Sherwin-Williams 
arsenates  of  lead,  plats  0.  7,  25  and  20  did  not  receive  the  first  appli- 
cation; otherwise,  the  first  three  regular  applications  were  given 
to  all  plats.  Very  little  could  be  determined  from  the  foliage,  as 
insect  injuries  were  practically  the  same  for  all  plats.  A number 


24 


of  plats  had  so  few  apples  survive  the  freeze  that  they  were  not 
worthy  of  consideration.  The  following  table  shows  the  records 
which  were  obtained  by  examining  apples  from  the  plats  having 
fruit. 


Table  8. — Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  from  Trees  Sprayed  with 
Bordeaux  Mixture  and  Various  Arsenates  of  Lead,  1010 


Plat 

Treatment 

Applica- 
tions made 

~ct  Q* 

g 3 

Percent 

codling 

moth 

6 

2-50  Sherwin-Williams  arsenate 
with  i-4-50  Bordeaux  mixture 

2,  3 

691 

1 

35 

7 

7 

3-50  Sherwin-Williams  arsenate 
with  4-4-50  Bordeaux  mixture 

2,  3 

412 

20 

6 

10 

2-50  Vreeland  powdered  arsenate 
with  4-4-50  Bordeaux  mixture 

1,  2,  3 

152 

36 

8 

20 

3-50  Grasselli  arsenate  with  4-4- 
50  Bordeaux  mixture 

1,  2,  3 

228 

30 

9 

21 

2-50  Lion  arsenate  with  4-4-50 
Bordeaux  mixture 

L 2,  3 

204 

52 

8 

22 

3-50  Lion  arsenate  with  4-4-50 
Bordeaux  mixture 

1,  2,  3 

398 

68 

4 

23 

3-50  Vreeland  arsenate  with  4- 
4-50  Bordeaux  mixture 

1,  2,  3 

345 

60 

18 

Check 

No  treatment 

210 

100 

28 

Because  of  the  small  amounts  of  fruit  harvested  from  the 
above  plats,  such  data  as  these  are  quite  inadequate  from  which 
to  draw  any  definite  conclusions.  However,  it  is  interesting  to  note 
that  as  a rule  3 poundsof  arsenate  of  lead  were  not  any  more 
etlicient  in  preventing  codling  moth  and  curculio  injuries  than 
2 pounds.  It  is  also  evident  from  these  data  that  the  first  applica- 
tion, which  was  made  just  before  the  bloom,  had  no  influence 
upon  these  two  insects,  since  plats  6 and  7,  which  did  not  receive 
this  application,  showed  practically  ihe  least  amount  of  injury. 

Arsenates  of  Lead  with  Lime  Sulfur 

When  arsenate  of  lead  is  added  to  lime  sulfur  solution,  a 
chemical  reaction  between  the  two  takes  place.  The  extent  and 
nature  of  this  reaction  differs  in  the  case  of  the  different  arse- 
nates.* To  determine  whether  or  not  there  was  any  differ- 
ence in  the  action  upon  the  trees  (due  to  this  variation  in  the 

* C.  E.  Bradley  and  H.  V.  Tartar:  Further  Studies  of  the  Reactions  of  Lime  Sulfur  Solu- 

tion and  Alkali  Waters  on  Lead  Arsenates.  Journal  of  Industrial  and  Engineering  Chemistry 
Vol.  2.  No.  7,  page  328.  (1910). 


25 


reaction) . the  following  brands  were  added  to  diluted  commercial 
lime  sulfur  and  tested,  two  pounds  of  arsenate  per  50  gallons 
being  used,  as  indicated. 


P at  1.  Sherwin-Williams  paste  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  2.  Hemingway  paste  arsenate e_5n 

Plat  3.  Star  brand  paste  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  4.  Vreeland  powdered  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  5.  Yreeland  paste  arsenate . .2-50 


These  plats  were  given  the  2nd,  3rd  and  4th  applications, 
the  first  application  was  omitted,  owing  to  a delay  in  the  re- 
ceipt of  some  of  the  arsenates  of  lead.  These  trees  withstood  the 
cold  very  well,  and  recovered  quite  rapidly  from  all  apparent 
injury. 

Considering  the  effects  on  the  foliage,  lime  sulfur  in  combi- 
nahon  with  Sherwin-Williams  arsenate  of  lead,  as  used  on  plat 
1.  gave  the  best  results.  This  mixture  was  the  most  adhesive, 
permitted  the  least  scab,  and  caused  very  little  foliage  injury’ 
The  arsenates  of  lead  used  on  the  other  plats  acted  much  alike. 
The  fourth  application  caused  some  foliage  injury,  which  was  a 
little  more  severe  upon  trees  receiving  lime  sulfur  and  Heming- 
way and  Star  arsenates  of  lead  than  those  which  received  lime 
sulfur  in  combination  with  the  Yreeland  brands.  Any  differ- 
ence in  insect  injury  to  the  foliage  was  too  small  to  be  noticed. 

All  plats  had  some  fruit  survive  the  freeze.  It  was  picked 
and  examined  October  26,  with  the  following  results: 

Table  9*  Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  .'from  Trees  Sprayed  with 
Lime  Sulfur  and  Various  Arsenates  of  Lead,  1910 


6 crj 

+JO 

| 

Plat 

Treatment 

Applica- 

tions 

© 

<v  ", 

O £5 

1^  5D 

O <X- 

made 

a 
o cs 

s w 

s ^ 
a P 

s 

■ 

a o 

CU  ~ 

1 

2-50 

Sherwin-Williams 

2,  3,  4 

267 

58 

19 

A 

6 

arsenate  with  lime 
sulfur 

U 

9 

2-50 

Hemingway  arsen- 

2, 3,  4 

318 

98 

5 \ 

14 

f.  ft 

3 

ate  with  1 ime  sulfur 

40 

2-50 

Star  brand  arsenate 
with  lime  sulfur 

2,  3,  4 

1225 

100 

27 

3 

36 

4 

2-50 

Yreeland  dry  ar- 

2, 3,  4 

489 

83 

31 

09 

senate  with  lime 
sulfur 

5 

2-50 

Vreeland  arsenate 

2,  3,  4 

337 

68 

30 

6 

9 /. 

Check 

with  lime  sulfur 

£ 4 

No  treatment 

210 

100 

100 

28 

20 

26 


The  results  recorded  in  this  table  corroborate  those  obtained 
upon  the  foliage.  They  show  that  fruit  from  those  trees  receiv- 
ing lime  sulfur  combined  with  the  Sherwin-Williams  arsenate 
of  lead  (plat  1)  suffered  the  least  from  scab,  curculio  and  russet. 
The  next  in  order  are  the  Vreeland  brands,  between  which  there 
is  little  difference,  excepting  in  the  amount  of  scab.  In  the  pre- 
vention of  scab,  the  dry  arsenate  of  lead  in  combination  with 
lime  sulfur  (plat  4),  was  somewhat  more  effective  than  the  paste 
arsenate  similarly  used.  Of  the  Star  and  Hemingway  brands, 
in  combination  with  lime  sulfur,  neither  exerted  much  influence 
in  the  control  of  scab.  Of  these  two  the  Star  brand  was  more 
efficient  in  preventing  curculio  and  codling  moth  injuries.  Both 
brands  caused  considerable  russet,  those  apples  sprayed  with  the 
Hemingway  brand  showing  more  russet  than  those  receiving  the 
Star  brand.  Since  the  treatment  given  these  plats  was  identical 
except  in  the  brand  of  arsenate  of  lead  used,  the  variation  in  the 
results  must  be  due  in  part,  at  least,  to  differences  in  the  re- 
actions resulting  when  the  different  arsenates  of  lead  are  mixed 
with  the  lime  sulfur  solution. 

From  these  results  we  must  conclude  that  for  the  summer 
treatment  of  apples,  the  neutral  arsenate  of  lead  (to  which  class 
the  Sherwin-Williams  belongs)  in  combination  with  lime  sulfur 
solution  produces  a. spray  which  is  more  efficient  and  safer  to 
use  than  one  made  by  combining  lime  sulfur  solution  with  ar- 
senates of  lead  containing  higher  percentages  of  arsenic  and 
known  as  acid  arsenates.* 


* The  following  extract  from- an  article  by  W.  H.  Volck,  entitled  “The 
Significance  of  Lead  Arsenate  Composition’',  published  in  Science  N.  S. 
Vol.  33,  Number  857,  pages  886,  870,  June  2,  1911,  has  a bearing  upon 
this  point.  “The  acid  arsenates  are  stable  under  acid  conditions,  but  are 
transposed  into  the  ortho-arsenate,  the  most  stable  compound,  under 
neutral  and  alkaline  conditions.  The  transposition  involves  the  libera- 
tion of  arsenic  oxide  or  soluble  arsenates.  The  significance  is  at  once 
apparent.  When  arsenate  of  lead  is  applied  as  a spray  it  is  subjected  to 
neutral  and  alkaline  conditions.  This  is  especially  true  if  the  water 
used  in  spraying  contains  alkalies.  That  is,  the  conditions  favorable  to 
the  transpositions  of  the  acid  arsenates  into  the  ortho-compound  obtain. 
As  fast  as  the  neutral  waters  of  fogs,  dews,  and  rains  wash  away  the 
liberated  arsenic  oxide,  or  when  the  latter  is  absorbed  by  the  plant  tis- 
sues themselves,  the  conditions  are  restored  for  more  to  be  formed.  The 
ultimate  result  is  the  complete  transposition  of  the  acid  arsenates  to  the 
ortho-compound  and  the  liberation  of  the  excess  arsenic  oxide.” 


27 


Tests  in  1911 

Arsenates  of  Lead  with  Bordeaux  Mixture 
In  1911  the  following  arsenates  of  lead  were  tested  in  com- 
bination with  4-4-50  Bordeaux  mixture,  the  amounts  used  being 
as  indicated : 

Plat  11.  Swift  paste  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  12.  Yreeland  paste  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  13.  Yreeland  powdered  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  14.  Yreeland  powdered  arsenate  1-50 

Plat  15.  Hemingway  paste  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  16.  Sherwin-Williams  paste  arsenate  2-50 

These  plats  were  given  the  first  three  regular  summer  appli- 
cations. Very  little  was  to  be  learned  from  examination  of  the 
foliage,  as  the  amount  of  insect  injury  to  the  leaves  was  very 
small.  There  was  no  noticeable  difference  in  the  adhesiveness  of 
the  different  mixtures.  The  following  is  a table  showing  the 
results  of  the  examination  of  the  fruit. 

Table  10.  Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  from  Trees  Sprayed  with 
Bordeaux  Mixture  and  Various  Arsenates  of  Lead,  1911 


c n 
O 

Apples 

o 

-I 

Plat 

Treatment 

C CC 
O a 

Total 

No. 

Total 

bu. 

Percent 

° o 

5 ® 

Q. 

< 

1 

9 

Gulls 

CD  ^ 

a,  g 

<D  • — 

j 

O 

a>  P 

11 

2-50  Swift  arsenate 
with  4-4-50  Bordeaux 

1,2,3 

8365 

36y8 

75 

22 

3 

1 

8 

19 

12 

2-50  Vreeland  arsenate 
with  4-4-50  Bordeaux 

1,2,3 

7835 

32% 

61 

23 

16 

3 

5 

13 

2-50  Yreeland  dry  arse- 
nate with  4-4-50  Bor- 
deaux 

1,2,3 

15565 

62% 

77 

18 

5 

3 

5 

11 

14 

1-50  Yreeland  dry  arse- 
nate with  4-4-50  Bor- 
deaux 

1,2,3 

10200 

40 

60 

28 

12 

7 

7 

30 

15 

2-50  Hemingway  arse- 
nate with  4-4-50  Bor- 
deaux 

1,2,3 

5245 

22 

57 

33 

10 

\ 

7 

8 

16 

2t50  Sherwin-Williams 
arsenate  with  Bor- 
deaux 

1,2,3 

3132 

13% 

71 

20 

9 

0 

7 

7 

Check 

No  treatment 

937 

4 

10 

30 

60 

6 

6 

0 

Here  again  very  little  can  be  determined  by  such  results, 
since  the  table  shows  a variation  of  only  7%  in  curculio  injury 
botween  the  different  plats,  and  but  3%  in  codling  moth  injury. 
The  variation  in  the  percentage  of  russeting  between  (he  differ- 
ent plats  may  be  due  in  part  to  the  arsenate  of  lead  which  was 
used,  as  other  conditions  were  the  same. 


28 


Arsenates  of  Lead  with  Lime  Sulfur  Solution 
To  further  test  the  action  of  the  various  arsenates  of  lead 
when  applied  in  combination  with  lime  sulfur  solution,  the  fol- 
lowing brands  w'ere  added  to  commercial  lime  sulfur  and  tested, 
the  number  of  pounds  in  each  50  gallons  of  spray  being  as  indi- 


cated : 

Plat  1.  Yreeland  dry  arsenate .2-50 

Plat  2.  Yreeland  dry  arsenate 1-50 

Plat  3.  Yreeland  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  4.  Eagle  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  5.  Grasselli  arsenate  alone 2-50 

Plat  6.  Swift  arsenate 2-50 

Plat  7.  Sherwin-Williams  arsenate . 2-50 

Plat  8.  Grasselli  arsenate 1-50 

Plat  9.  Hemingway  arsenate. 2-50 


Plat  10.  Summer  strength  lime  sulfur  alone. 

These  plats  were  given  the  three  regular  applications.  There 
was  some  foliage  injury  on  all  plals  from  time  to  time  thruout 
the  summer,  but  only  in  plat  5,  which  received  Grasselli  arsenate 
of  lead  alone,  was  it  of  a permanent  nature.  In  this  plat  there 
was  very  little  injury  until  about  the  middle  of  September,  at 
which  time  the  leaves  turned  brown  along  the  edges  and  at  the 
tips.  These  trees  retained  this  frost  bitten  appearance  thruout 
the  remainder  of  the  season,  and  about  25%  of  the  leaves  fell 
prematurely.  The  materials  used  on  plats  7,  8 and  9 appeared 
to  be  slightly  more  adhesive  than  those  used  on  the  other  plats. 

These  plats  all  had  an  abundance  of  fruit,  which  was  picked 
October  24  and  25,  and  examined  with  the  results  shown  in 
Table  11. 

The  thing  most  noticeable  in  this  table  is  the  variation  in 
the  amount  of  scab.  Plats  7,  G and  3,  which  were  sprayed  with 
Sherwin-Williams,  Swift,  and  Yreeland  arsenates  of  lead, 
respectively,  were  least  infected  with  scab,  having  16, 18  and  19% 
of  the  apples  scabby.  Owing  to  the  small  amount  of  insect 
injury,  little  can  he  said  as  to  the  comparative  insecticidal  value 
of  Ihe  different  brands.  There  was  a varying  amount  of  russet 
and  ‘‘burn”  credited  to  the  different  plats,  but  the  difference  is  not 
great.  However,  since  neither  arsenate  of  lead  nor  lime  sulfur 
when  used  alone  caused  any  “burning,”  this  inj  ury  is  undoubtedly 
due  to  the  reaction  resulting  when  the  two  are  combined. 

Attention  is  called  especially  to  the  records  obtained  in  plat 
5,  which  received  arsenate  of  lead  only,  and  plat  10,  which 
received  lime  sulfur  only.  It  will  be  seen  from  these  results 
that  lime  sulfur  solution  and  arsenate  of  lead  when  used  alone 


29 


Table  11. — Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  from  Trees  Sprayed  with 
Lime  Sulfur  and  Various  Arsenates  of  Lead,  1911 


GO 

Apples 

o 

O 

3 © 

Percent 

Percent 

scab 

o 
C — 

d 't-3 

Percent 

burn 

Plat 

Treatment 

Total 

No. 

Total 

bu. 

1 

2 

Culls 

- p— ’ 

O -j 

Oh  g 

CD 

P be 
<x>.£ 

n 

73 

O 

o 

<D  P 
Oh  ^ 

1 

2-50  Vreeland 
arsenate  with 
lime  sulfur 

1,2,3 

9473 

42% 

68 

23 

9 

28 

8 

11 

5 

11 

2 

1-50  Vreeland 
dry  arsenate 
with  lime  sulfur 

1,2,3 

5495 

26% 

80 

17 

3 

20 

6 

11 

2 

1 

3 

2-50  Vreeland 
dry  arsenate 
with  lime  sulfur 

1,2,3 

5944 

27  Vs 

82 

17 

1 

19 

19 

7 

2 

5 

4 

2-50  Eagle  ar- 
senate with 
lime  sulfur . 

1,2,3 

4595 

20% 

72 

19 

9 

35 

13 

9 

11 

n 

i 

5 

2-50  Grasselli 
arsenate  alone 

1,2,3 

1352 

5% 

63 

24 

13 

52 

4 

1 

1 

0 

6 

2-50  Swift  ar- 
senate with 
lime  sulfur 

1,2,3 

4175 

22% 

86 

12 

2 

18 

3 

8’ 

5 

5 

7 

2-50  Sherwin- 
Williams  ar- 
senate with 
lime  sulfur 

1,2,3 

5905 

27  % 

78 

17 

5 

16 

7 

0 

3 

2 

8 

1-50  Grasselli 
arsenate  with 
lime  sulfur 

1,2,3 

4395 

17% 

73 

20 

7 

25 

13 

5 

1 

5 

9 

2-50  Heming- 
way arsenate 
with  lime  sul- 
fur 

1,2,3 

4617 

23% 

65 

26 

9 

36 

4 

8 

8 

4 

10 

Check 

Lime  sulfur 
alone 

No  treatment 

1,2,3 

2380 

1396 

12% 

5 

55 

33 

57 

12 

43 

41 

89 

12 

15 

26 

16 

15 

0 

0 

0 

each  possess  some  fungicidal  value,  but  that  by  combining  the 
two  a much  more  efficient  spray  is  produced.  One  point  diffi- 
cult to  explain  is  the  large  amount  of  insect  injury  recorded 
against  plat  10.  The  fruit  in  this  plat  suffered  worse  from  cod- 
ling moth  than  did  any  of  the  check  trees  thruout  Ihe  entire 
orchard. 

Allho  the  results  recorded  in  Ihe  different  columns  do  not 
show  wide  variation  between  the  different  plats,  they  are  in 
accord  with  those  obtained  in  1910,  which  showed  lhat  in  com- 
bination with  lime  sulfur  solution,  the  neutral  arsenate  of  lead 
produced  a spray  which  was  more  efficient  and  safer  to  use 
than  those  arsenates  higher  in  arsenic  oxid. 


30 


CERTAIN  NEW  FUNGICIDES  AND  INSECTICIDES 

Manufacturing  chemists  are  placing  upon  the  market  from 
time  to  time  many  new  fungicides  and  insecticides.  Some  of 
them  are  so  highly  recommended  by  the  manufacturers  that  it  was 
deemed  advisable  to  test  a few  of  them  in  the  field.  Certain  pos- 
sible fungicides  and  insecticides  are  also  always  presenting 
themselves  to  persons  engaged  in  spraying  and  some  of  the  most 
promising  were  tested  in  1911.  The  following  homemade  and 
proprietary  mixtures  were  experimented  with : 

Plat  17.  Lime  sulfur-arsenate  with  2 pounds  of  copper  sulfate  to 
each  50  gallons 

Plat  18.  Lime  sulfur-arsenate  with  1 pound  of  copper  sulfate  to 
each  50  gallons 

Plat  19.  Bordeaux-arsenate  1-1-2-50,  to  which  has  been  added  com- 
mercial lime  sulfur  containing  4 pounds  of  sulfur  in  solu- 
tion 

Plat  20.  Lime  sulfur-arsenate  with  3 pounds  of  copper  sulfate  to 
each  50  gallons 

Plat  27.  Cucasa,  IV2  pounds  to  40  gallons  of  water,  with  2 pounds 
arsenate  of  lead  per  50  gallons 

Plat  28.  Copper  ferrocyanide 

Plat  40.  Sulfocide,  1 gallon  to  250  gallons  water,  with  Paris  green  4 
ounces  to  each  50  gallons. 

With  the  exception  of  plat  40  the  first  three  regular  applica- 
tions were  given.  The  injury  following  the  second  application 
of  Sulfocide  and  Paris  green  was  so  severe  that  it  was  necessary 
to  discontinue  the  treatment. 

' Effect  on  Foliage 

All  the  mixtures  of  lime  sulfur-arsenate  and  copper  sulfate 
showed  quite  plainly  upon  the  trees  and  varied  in  color  from 
dark  brown  to  almost  black.  Plats  18  and  19  looked  very  much 
alike,  with  plat  17  a somewhat  darker  brown,  and  plat/ 20  almost 
black.  Permanent  injury  from  these  sprays  was  negligible,  altho 
for  several  days  after  the  application  to  plat  20  had  been  made  the 
foliage  presented  a scorched  appearance  which  soon  disappeared, 
andthruout  the  remainder  of  the  season  the  trees  appeared  very 
healthy.  There  was  an  abundance  of  foliage  of  good  size  and  of 
a dark  green  color  011  all  of  these  plats.  These  mixtures  were  all 
of  about  equal  adhesiveness,  and  remained  visible  thruout  most 
of  the  summer. 

Cucasa  when  dry  upon  the  trees  very  much  resembled  Bor- 
deaux mixture  but  did  not  prove  quite  so  adhesive.  There  was 
some  foliage  injury  at  different  times  during  the  summer,  and 


31 


about  20  percent  of  the  leaves  turned  yellow  and  fell.  The  ma- 
terial used  was  some  that  was  carried  over  from  1910,  and  may 
have  been  less  satisfactory  than  the  fresh  product  might  have 
been. 

Copper  ferrocyailide  is  a new  spray  of  considerable  promise 
made  from  copper  sulfate  and  potassium  ferrocyailide.  The  two 
salts  were  dissolved  separately,  and  when  poured  together  pro- 
duced aflocculent  red  precipitate  of  copper  forrocyanide.  This 
mixture,  when  applied,  was  quite  visible  and  gave  a red  cast  to 
the  foliage.  The  foliage  was  quite  dense,  of  good  size,  and  much 
darker  green  and  glossier  than  that  on  any  other  plat  in  the 
orchard.  No  injury  of  any  kind  was  noticed  at  any  time  during 
the  season.  It  is  thought  that  this  mixture  possesses  both  in- 
secticidal and  fungicidal  value,  but  owing  to  the  scarcity  of 
insect  pests  and  fungous  diseases,  as  well  as  conditions  condu- 
cive to  foliage  injury,  the  results  obtained,  this  year  were  rather 
indefinite.  The  cost  of  this  material  at  the  strength  used  is 
about  one-third  that  of  lime  sulfur-arsenate. 

Effect  on  Fruit 

The  records  upon  the  fruit  from  plat  26,  which  was  sprayed 
with  4-4-2-50  Bordeaux  mixture,  were  used  with  which  to  com- 
pare that  harvested  from  the  plats  in  this  experiment. 

These  records  show  (Table  12)  that  of  the  four  sprays  used 
on  plats  17,  18,  19  and  20,  made  by  combining  lime  sulfur- 
arsenate  and  varying  amounts  of  copper  sulfate,  those  used  on 
plats  17  and  19  controlled  scab  exceptionally  well.  The  spray 
injury  as  shown  by  the  russet  and  burn  columns  was  negligible. 
The  grading  was  fairly  good  for  all  plats.  These  results  seem  to 
indicate  that  the  mixtures  made  from  lime  sulfur-arsenate  with 
2 pounds  of  copper  sulfate  and  with  the  Bordeaux  mixture,  as 
used  on  plats  17  and  19,  respectively,  are  probably  the  best  com- 
binations. The  mixture  with  1 pound  copper  sulfate  appeared  to 
be  loo  weak  to  properly  control  the  fungous  diseases,  and  the 
mixture  with  3 pounds  of  copper  sulfate  produced  a very  bulky 
precipitate  which  prevented  a thoro  coating  of  all  parts  of  the 
fruit  and  foliage. 

The  fungicidal  value  of  Cucasa  was  almost  equal  to  that  of 
Bordeaux  mixture,  and  no  russeting  of  the  fruit  followed  its  use. 
Copper  ferrocyanide,  the  material  applied  to  plat  28,  was  used 
very  sparingly,  as  nothing  was  known  regarding  its  action  upon 
the  foliage  and  fruit  previous  to  this  test.  These  are  the  first 


32 


Table  12. — Examination  of  Picked  Fruit  from  Trees  Sprayed  with 


Certain  New  Mixtures,  1911 


CO 

Apples 

^ be 
G c 

C 

Plat 

Treatment 

o rf  ~ 

1 c ^ 

S.2  a 

Total 

No. 

CO  • 

[Percent 

03  rQ 
o cO 

fn  O 

a.  M 
o sG 

a>  u 
2-  & 

o 

<D  O 
O CO 

o £ 

O j3 

1 

2 

Culls 

<V  co 

Oh 

QJ  P-* 

G3  G 

17 

Lime  sulfur-arsenate 
with  2-50  copper 
sulfate 

1,  2,  3 

2980 

14f 

78 

19 

3 

7 

3 

1 

1 

18 

Lime  sulfur-arsenate 
with  1-50  copper 
sulfate 

1,2,3 

4773 

20f 

70 

23 

7 

22 

16 

9 

3 

19 

Lime  sulfur-arsenate 
with  1-1-50  Bor- 
deaux mixture 

1,  2,3 

3158 

14| 

81 

17 

2 

8 

0 

3 

0 

20 

Lime  sulfur-arsenate 
with  3-50  copper 
sulfate  - . 

1,  2,3 

7175 

32f 

85 

14 

1 

25 

30 

4 

0 

26 

4-4-2-50  Bordeaux- 
arsenate 

1,  2,3 

9870 

37! 

71 

20 

9 

18 

0 

7 

0 

27 

Cucasa  7% -40,  2-50 
arsenate  

1,  2,  3 

4520 

21! 

70 

28 

2 

24 

0. 

0 

0 

28 

Copper  ferrocyanide. 

1,  2,  3 

7725 

31! 

83 

15 

2 

29 

13 

0 

0 

Check 

No  treatment 

1589 

6 

11 

42 

47 

85 

99 

0 

0 

results  obtained  upon  fruit  sprayed  with  this  mixture  and  are 
very  encouraging.  The  apples  picked  from  this  plat  were  col- 
ored perfectly  and  had  a very  polished  finish. 

While  most  of  these  new  sprays  gave  very  promising  results 
no  recommendations  can  be  made  until  they  have  been  further 
tested. 


33 


SUMMARY 

1.  Bordeaux  mixture,  made  from  4 pounds  of  copper  sul- 
fate, 4 pounds  of  lime  and  50  gallons  of  water,  is  a more  efficient 
fungicide  for  use  upon  apples  than  any  of  the  lime  sulfur  sprays. 

2.  A concentrated  lime  sulfur  solution  equivalent  in  effi- 
ciency to  commercial  solutions  can  be  made  and  stored  by  the 
grower. 

3.  Self-boiled  lime  and  sulfur  is  easily  washed  off  and 
possesses  very  little  fungicidal  value  in  the  control  of  apple 
scab. 

4.  Applications  of  lime  sulfur  in  combination  with  arsenate 
of  lead,  made  later  than  two  or  three  weeks  after  the  fall  of  the 
petals,  are  apt  to  cause  serious,  injury  to  both  foliage  and  fruit. 

5.  The  most  satisfactory  treatment  for  apples  consisted  of 
i ) 4-4-2-50  Bordeaux-arsenate  for  the  application  immediately 

preceding  the  bloom;,  (2)  lime  sulfur  solution,  50  gallons  of 
which  contained  4 pounds  of  sulfur,  in  combination  with  2 
pounds  of  arsenate  of  lead,  for  the  application  immediately  after 
the  fall  of  the  petals,  and  (3)  4-4-2-50  Bordeaux-arsenate  for 
the  application  made  about  ten  days  after  the  fall  of  the  petals. 

6.  Injuries  to  foliage  and  fruit  following  the  use  of  Bor- 
deaux mixture  were  lessened  (1)  by  following  the  applications  of 
Bordeaux  mixture  as  soon  as  dry  with  4-50  milk  of  lime,  and  (2) 
by  using  the  drench  spray  of  Bordeaux  mixture. 

/.  Applications  of  milk  of  lime  had  a stimulating  effect 
upon  the  foliage,  and  in  1910  shielded  the  fruit  from  the  freeze 
of  April  23. 

8.  In  1911  a solution  of  lime  sulfur  containing  2%  pounds 
of  sulfur  in  each  50  gallons,  and  combined  with  arsenate  of 
lead,  prevented  scab  better  than  did  stronger  solutions. 

9.  For  use  with  lime  sulfur  solution,  neutral  or  ortho  arse- 
nate .of  lead  gave  better  results  than  arsenates  containing  higher 
percentages  of  arsenic  oxid. 

10.  A mixture  of  lime  sulfur  solution  and  arsenate  of  lead 
was  more  efficient  in  preventing  apple  scab  than  lime  sulfur 
used  alone. 

11.  Arsenate  of  lead  when  used  alone  exerted  some  fungi- 
cidal action,  but  caused  considerable  foliage  injury. 

12.  Lime  sulfur-arsenate  in  combination  with  copper  sul- 
fate gave  an  efficient  spray  and  caused  no  injury  to  either  fruit 
or  foliage. 

13.  Sulfocide  in  combination  with  Paris  green  caused  very 


34 


serious  foliage  injury. 

14.  Cucasa  proved  almost  as  efficient  as  Bordeaux  mixture 
in  preventing  infection  of  scab,  and  caused  no  russeting  of  the 
fruit  but  considerable  injury  to  the  foliage. 

15.  Copper  ferrocyanide,  made  from  copper  sulfate  and 
potassium  ferrocyanide,  controlled  scab  and  insects  very 
efficiently. 


Fig.  7 — Station  Headquarters,  Neoga,  Illinois 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  MARCH,  1912 


CIRCULAR  No.  160 

(Third  Edition,  Revised,  March,  1915) 


SOME  COMMON  SPRAY  MIXTURES 

By  0.  S.  Watkins 
Associate  in  Horticultural  Chemistry 


Contents 


Fungicides : Page 

Bordeaux  mixture 3 

Lime  sulfur  as  a summer  spray 7 

Insecticides : 

Stomach  poisons  12 

Contact  poisons  13 

Spraying  schedule  for  Illinois  apple  orchards 14 

Spraying  schedule  for  Illinois  peach  orchards 16 

Kesults  of  experiments  in  spraying  apple  orchards  conducted  during 
1914: 

Tests  of  various  brands  of  arsenate  of  lead 17 

Special  sprays  for  codling  moth 18 


SOME  COMMON  SPRAY  MIXTURES 


The  protection  of  fruit  trees  from  the  ravages  of  fungous  dis- 
eases and  insect  pests  by  spraying  is  no  longer  an  experiment.  No 
phase  of  horticultural  activity  is  attracting  more  attention  today1 
than  the  proper  use  of  fungicides  and  insecticides,  since  the  quality  of 
the  fruit  which  is  placed  upon  the  market  is  determined  largely  by 
the  character  of  the  spraying  which  has  been  done. 

FUNGICIDES 

A fungicide  is  a preparation  which  has  for  its  active  agent  some 
chemical  by  which  the  development  of  fungous  spores  is  retarded  or 
prevented.  It  is  generally  applied  with  water,  which  serves  as  a dis- 
tributing agent  for  the  active  ingredient.  Fungicides  are  designed 
to  control  such  diseases  as  apple  scab,  apple  blotch,  bitter  rot,  brown 
rot,  and  many  other  fungi  of  a similar  nature. 

BORDEAUX  MIXTURE 

Bordeaux  mixture  is  the  standard  fungicide  for  most  of  the  dis- 
eases injurious  to  orchard  and  garden  crops.  It  was  introduced  into 
this  country  from  Europe  in  1887  by  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Agricul- 
ture. The  original  formula  has  been  modified  somewhat ; the  mixture 
giving  the  best  results  today  is  one  made  from — 

4 pounds  of  copper  sulfate 
4 pounds  of  lime 
50  gallons  of  water 

Small  Quantities 

When  the  small  home  orchard  composed  of  only  a few  trees  is  to 
be  sprayed,  the  equipment  should  consist  of  a 50-gallon  barrel,  two 
tubs  of  at  least  25  gallons  capacity,  two  buckets,  and  a paddle.  Ar- 
range the  tubs  so  that  one  is  on  either  side  of  the  barrel.  Place  in  one 
of  the  tubs  25  gallons  of  water  and  dissolve  in  it  4 pounds  of  copper 
sulfate  suspended  in  a coarse  sack  just  below  the  surface  of  the  water. 
About  one  hour  should  be  allowed  for  this ; but  if  hot  water  is  avail- 
able, the  copper  sulfate  can  be  dissolved  in  a small  quantity  in  much 
less  time,  and  the  solution  then  diluted  to  25  gallons  with  cold  water.  In 
the  other  tub  carefully  slake  4 pounds  of  stone  lime,  using  only  suf- 
ficient (hot)  water  to  have  the  lime,  when  thoroly  slaked,  in  the  form 
of  a thick  paste,  in  which  form  it  should  be  allowed  to  cool.  When 
■cold,  dilute  to  25  gallons.  The  copper  sulfate  and  milk  of  lime  are  now 
ready  to  mix ; two  persons  are  necessary  for  the  operation.  Have  the 


4 


contents  of  each  tub  well  stirred ; then  ponr  a bucketful  of  each  mix- 
ture simultaneously  into  the  barrel,  allowing  the  two  streams  to  come 
together.  Continue  in  the  same  way  until  the  entire  amount  is  made. 
Thoroly  agitate  the  blue  mixture  in  the  barrel,  and  transfer  it  thru 
a strainer  into  the  spray  tank.  It  is  now  ready  for  application. 

Large  Quantities 

In  preparing  Bordeaux  mixture  for  use  in  the  large  commercial 
orchard,. where  spraying  is  done  from  one  or  more  200-gallon  tanks, 
it  is  customary  to  make  up  stock  solutions  of  lime  and  copper  sulfate, 
in  order  to  avoid  the  delays  which  would  be  occasioned  by  slaking  each 
batch  of  lime  and  dissolving  each  lot  of  copper  sulfate  separately. 

Slaking  the  Lime.- — One  of  the  most  important  steps  in  the  prepa- 
ration of  Bordeaux  mixture  is  the  slaking  of  the  lime;  care  must 
be  taken  to  have  this  properly  done.  At  least  a day  before  the  spray- 
ing operations  are  to  begin,  slake  one  or  more  batches  of  lime  of  50 
pounds  each  by  placing  the  lime  in  a slaking  box  or  barrel,  together 
with  7 or  8 gallons  of  water,  which  is  a sufficient  quantity  to  start  the 
action.  As  soon  as  the  lime  begins  to  slake,  it  should  be  continually 
stirred.  More  water  should  be  added  as  needed  from  -time  to  time  to 
prevent  the  development  of  too  much  heat  and  the  consequent  “burn- 
ing ’ ’ of  the  lime.  When  too  small  an  amount  of  water  is  used,  the  lime 
crumbles  to  a powder,  with  the  result  that  there  are  many  small  lumps 
that  do  not  completely  slake ; these  have  to  be  thrown  out  when  the  lime 
is  strained  into  the  tank.  On  the  other  hand,  too  much  water  should 
also  be  avoided,  for  this  likewise  causes  incomplete  slaking,  and  there- 
fore a reduction  in  the  actual  amount  of  lime  added  to  the  mixture. 
During  the  process  of  slaking,  lime  should  have  constant  attention; 
only  a small  quantity  of  water  should  be  added  at  a time  so  as  to  keep 
the  action  even  and  insure  the  lime  being  perfectly  slaked. 

When  the  lime  is  completely  slaked,  it  should  be  a rather  thick 
paste,  in  which  form  it  should  be  allowed  to  cool.  In  slaking  lime  to 
be  used  in  the  preparation  of  Bordeaux  mixture,  the  paste  mass  should 
never  be  cooled  artificially,  for  if  this  is  done  the  action  is  not  com- 
pleted. When  the  slaked  lime  is  cold,  transfer  to  the  stock-solution 
barrel  (if  a slaking  box  has  been  used),  and  add  sufficient  water  to 
bring  the  total  volume  in  the  barrel  to  50  gallons.  This  mixture  is 
termed  a stock  solution;  when  well  mixed,  each  gallon  contains  1 
pound  of  lime. 

Copper-Sulfate  Solution. — To  prepare  the  stock  solution  of  cop- 
per sulfate,  suspend  50  pounds  of  blue  stone  in  a burlap  sack  near  the 
top  of  a 50-gallon  barrel  nearly  filled  with  water.  Several  hours  should 
be  allowed  for  solution  to  take  place.  When  all  of  the  sulfate  is  dis- 
solved, bring  the  total  volume  in  the  barrel  to  50  gallons.  When  well 
mixed,  each  gallon  contains  1 pound  of  copper  sulfate. 


In  order  to  keep  the  stock  solutions  at  their  original  strengths  the 
volumes  of  the  material  in  each  of  the  stock-solution  barrels  should  be 
noted  at  the  completion  of  each  application,  and,  before  any  more  Bor- 
deaux mixture  is  made,  water  should  be  added  to  replace  that  which 
has  been  lost  by  evaporation. 

Making  the  Mixture. — There  are  two  methods  by  which  Bordeaux 
mixture  can  be  made  in  large  quantities:  one  in  which  an  elevated 
platform  is  used,  and  the  water  pumped  by  hand ; and  another  in  which 
no  elevated  platform  is  necessary,  but  all  solutions  are  pumped  by 
means  of  a tank  filler. 

(1)  With  Aid  of  Elevated  Platform. — For  the  making  of  large 
quantities  of  Bordeaux  mixture,  certain  equipment  is  necessary  which 
will  help  diminish  the  labor  and  avoid  waste  of  time.  An  elevated 
platform  situated  near  the  water  supply  is  an  essential  feature.  This 
platform  should  have  two  parts,  one  higher  than  the  other.  On  the 
lower  part  is  supported  a mixing  tank,  which  has  a capacity  equal  to 
that  of  the  spray  tank,  at  such  a distance  above  the  ground  as  will 
allow  the  delivery  of  the  mixture  by  gravity  to  the  top  of  the  spray 
tank  driven  underneath.  On  the  upper  platform  there  should  be  two 
diluting  tubs,  each  of  a capacity  of  at  least  100  gallons,  several  barrels 
in  which  the  stock  solutions  of  copper  sulfate  and  lime  may  be  kept, 
and  sufficient  room  for  the  operator.  This  upper  platform  should  be 
at  such  a height  that  the  two  diluting  tubs  can  be  adjusted  to  deliver 
the  solutions  together  thru  a strainer  into  the  mixing  tank. 

The  necessary  equipment  provided,  and  the  stock  solutions  pre- 
pared to  make  200  gallons  of  Bordeaux  mixture,  using  the  4-4-50  for- 
mula (which  calls  for  4 pounds  of  copper  sulfate,  4 pounds  of  lime, 
and  50  gallons  of  water) , proceed  as  follows : Measure  into  one  of  the 
diluting  tubs  16  gallons  of  the  stock  solution  of  copper  sulfate ; then 
add  84  gallons  of  water.  In  the  other  tub  place  16  gallons  of  the  well- 
mixed  stock  solution  of  lime,  and  add  water  to  make  100  gallons  of  di- 
luted lime.  There  are  now  100  gallons  each  of  copper-sulfate  solution 
and  milk  of  lime.  Mix  these  solutions  by  conducting  equal  streams 
from  each  tub  directly  into  the  strainer  supported  over  the  mixing 
tank.  The  milk  of  lime  should  be  stirred  continually,  so  as  to  have  a 
homogeneous  mixture  at  all  times  coming  in  contact  with  the  copper- 
sulfate  solution. 

(2)  Using  the  Tank  Filler. — Manufacturers  of  spraying  machin- 
ery have  introduced  a very  convenient  device  called  a tank  filler,  by 
means  of  which  all  the  water  used  in  making  spraying  preparations 
can  be  pumped  by  the  power  sprayer.  To  make  200  gallons  of  Bor- 
deaux mixture,  using  the  4-4-50  formula,  the  following  is  the  proce- 
dure : Transfer  thru  a strainer  into  the  spray  tank  16  gallons  of  the 
well-mixed  stock  solution  of  lime ; then  add  84  gallons  of  water  to 


6 


bring  the  total  volume  of  the  diluted  lime  to  100  gallons.  Next  put  16 
gallons  of  the  stock  solution  of  copper  sulfate  into  a 100-gallon  tub, 
which  may  be  stationed  on  the  ground,  and  add  water  to  bring  the  total 
volume  of  copper-sulfate  solution  to  100  gallons.  Thoroly  mix  the 
copper  sulfate  and  water,  and,  with  the  agitator  in  the  spray  tank 
working  thruout  the  entire  process,  gradually  introduce  thru  the 
strainer  into  the  spray  tank  the  copper-sulfate  solution.  The  result- 
ing mixture  is  then  ready  for  use. 

Bordeaux  Injury 

Altho  Bordeaux  mixture  has  proved  to  be  a very  superior  fungi- 
cide, it  is  far  from  an  ideal  one.  During  the  last  few  years  applica- 
tions of  Bordeaux  mixture  have  frequently  produced  an  injury  to  fol- 
iage and  fruit  causing  the  leaves  to  turn  yellow  and  fall  and  the  apples 
to  become  russeted.  This  injury  is  most  common  during  continued 
rainy  weather,  but  it  has  been  shown  that  even  then  it  can  be  greatly 
reduced  by  taking  care  in  the  following  particulars : 

1.  Using  only  pure  lime  free  from  all  air-slaked  particles 

2.  Using  care  in  slaking  the  lime 

3.  Mixing  the  two  solutions  together  properly 

4.  Being  accurate  in  all  weights  and  measurements 

5.  Making  applications  at  the  proper  times 

6.  Spraying  thoroly 

7.  Adhering  to  directions 

In  combining  lime  and  copper  sulfate  in  making  Bordeaux  mix- 
ture, a chemical  reaction  takes  place.  Investigations  in  the  laboratory 
have  shown  that  the  composition  of  the  resulting  mixture  is  dependent 
not  only  upon  the  proportions  of  the  materials  that  are  used,  but  also 
upon  the  manner  of  combining  the  two.  Copper  sulfate  may  combine 
with  varying  amounts  of  lime,  the  minimum  being  in  the  proportion  of 
1 pound  of  lime  to  about  4 y2  pounds  of  copper  sulfate.  However,  a 
Bordeaux  mixture  made  after  a formula  which  calls  for  only  1 pound 
of  lime  to  4 pounds  of  copper  sulfate  would  be  dangerous  to  use,  as  the 
lime  would  soon  be  leached  out  by  the  rains,  leaving  soluble  copper 
salts  on  the  foliage  and  fruit;  this  would  likely  cause  serious  injury. 
The  maximum  amount  of  lime,  by  weight,  which  one  part  of  copper 
sulfate  will  combine  with,  is  about  an  equal  amount.  Experiences  in 
the  orchard  have  shown  that  the  best  fungicide  results  when  equal 
parts,  by  weight,  of  copper  sulfate  and  lime  are  used.  This  is  no  doubt 
true,  for  in  making  a Bordeaux  mixture  from  equal  parts  of  the  two 
salts,  as  is  done  in  using  the  4-4-50  formula,  the  most  stable  compound 
which  copper  sulfate  and  lime  form,  results. 

The  second  factor  influencing  the  composition  of  the  Bordeaux 
mixture,  namely,  the  manner  of  combining  the  two  solutions,  is  of 
equal  if  not  greater  importance  than  the  proportion  of  each  material 
used.  The  preceding  recommendations  are  based  upon  the  plan  of 


/ 


equal  and  full  dilution  before  mixing,  which  has  been  shown  by  experi- 
ence to  possess  advantages  over  other  ways  of  mixing.  Under  no  con- 
ditions should  the  lime,  either  diluted  or  in  concentrated  form,  be 
added  to  the  copper  sulfate,  nor  should  the  two  ingredients  be  com- 
bined in  concentrated  form  and  then  diluted.  As  has  been  stated,  the 
copper  sulfate  may  be  added  to  the  lime  or  the  two  solutions  may  be 
poured  together  simultaneously.  By  this  method  of  equal  and  full  di- 
lution before  mixing,  the  chemical  action  between  the  copper  sulfate 
and  the  lime  appears  to  take  place  more  quickly  and  completely  than 
by  any  of  the  other  methods.  The  resulting  mixture  settles  less  rap- 
idly, is  less  frequently  injurious,  and  attains  a maximum  of  adhe- 
siveness.1 

Some  growers  have  the  mistaken  idea  that  it  is  possible  to  lessen  the 
danger  of  injury  following  the  use  of  Bordeaux  mixture  by  still  fur- 
ther increasing  the  amount  of  lime  to  an  amount  much  in  excess  of  an 
equal  weight.  Since  it  is  the  copper  that  causes  the  injury,  it  appears 
that  the  greater  the  amount  of  lime  used  the  less  the  amount  of  copper 
that  can  go  into  solution,  but  under  Illinois  field  conditions  this  does 
not  hold  true.  An  excess  of  lime  over  that  amount  which  will  unite 
with  the  given  amount  of  copper  sulfate  is  a detriment  in  that  it  de- 
creases the  adhesiveness  of  the  mixture.  This  excess  of  lime,  after  it 
is  sprayed  upon  the  trees,  soon  is  converted  into  calcium  carbonate 
and  readily  washes  off,  carrying  with  it  much  of  the  Bordeaux  mixture 
which  would  not  otherwise  have  been  removed. 

Bordeaux  Arsenate  of  Lead  Mixture 

Generally  it  is  found  advantageous  to  combat  insects  with  the  same 
application  that  is  used  against  fungous  diseases.  This  can  be  very 
satisfactorily  accomplished  by  mixing  the  required  amount  of  arsenate 
of  lead,  prepared  according  to  directions  on  page  13,  with  the  diluted 
lime  just  before  the  lime  is  mixed  with  the  copper-sulfate  solution. 

LIME  SULFUR  AS  A SUMMER  SPRAY 

Owing  to  the  injury  sometimes  following  the  use  of  Bordeaux  mix- 
ture, growers  have  been  forced  to  seek  a less  caustic  fungicide  to  re- 
place this  very  superior  spray.  Lime-sulfur  solution,  which  for  a num- 
ber of  years  has  been  the  standard  material  for  controlling  San  Jose 
scale,  has  been  found  to  possess  some  fungicidal  properties,  and  under 
some  conditions  can  be  used  in  place  of  the  copper  sprays.  This  spray 
has  not  given  as  encouraging  results  under  Illinois  conditions  as  have 
been  reported  in  other  states ; so  growers  are  urged  not  to  rely  entirely 
upon  it  until  it  has  been  given  a more  thoro  test  under  varying  condi- 
tions. 


1C.  S.  Crandall,  111.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  135,  p.  214. 


8 


Of  the  mixtures  made  from  lime  and  sulfur  that  are  used  as  sprays 
for  the  summer  treatment  of  fruit  trees,  the  three  following  will  be 
considered:  home-concentrated,  commercial,  and  self -boiled  lime  and 
sulfur  mixtures. 

Home-concentrated  Lime  Sulfur 

Experiments  have  shown  that  concentrated  lime-sulfur  solution 
equivalent  in  efficiency  to  the  commercial  brands  can  be  made  by  the 
grower  at  considerably  less  expense  than  the  cost  of  factory-boiled 
products.  Making  lime  sulfur,  however,  is  a painstaking  and  disagree- 
able job;  so  those  who  have  use  for  only  a few  barrelfuls  are  advised 
to  purchase  one  of  the  commercial  brands.  Growers  having  several 
thousand  trees  to  spray  will  find  it  quite  a saving  to  prepare  their  own 
solution.  The  cooking  may  be  done  either  by  heating  in  a kettle  di- 
rectly with  coal  or  wood,  or  by  using  steam  as  the  source  of  heat.  The 
formula  by  which  lime  sulfur  may  be  most  economically  made  is  as 
follows : 

50  pounds  of  lime 
100  pounds  of  sulfur 

Water  to  make  66  gallons  of  finished  solution 

The  lime  should  be  fresh  stone  lime  free  from  all  air-slaked  parti- 
cles, and  one  that  slakes  rather  slowly.  Ground  commercial  sulfur 
will  prove  satisfactory. 

Kettle  Method. — The  first  thing  that  should  be  provided  is  a suit- 
able house  in  which  to  make  the  solution,  as  it  will  be  found  quite  dif- 
ficult to  control  the  fire  out  of  doors.  For  best  results  two  cookers  are 
needed,  one  in  which  to  cook  the  lime  sulfur  and  a second  to  furnish  a 
constant  supply  of  boiling  water.  This  latter  cooker  is  not  absolutely 
necessary,  but  by  its  use  the  actual  time  of  preparation  can  be  reduced 
almost  one-half.  There  should  also  be  prepared  one  straight  paddle 
about  four  feet  long,  and  another  paddle  about  five  feet  long  attached 
to  one  end  of  which  is  a perpendicular  piece  the  depth  of  the  kettle. 
The  first  paddle  is  to  use  while  the  lime  is  slaking,  and  the  second  will 
be  found  convenient  to  use  after  the  bulk  of  the  water  has  been  added. 
A measuring  stick,  graduated  to  show  the  depth  of  ten,  twenty,  thirty, 
etc.,  gallons,  up  to  the  capacity  of  the  kettle,  is  essential.  Accurate 
weights  and  measurements  are  required,  so  that  a reliable  pair  of  scales 
should  be  used.  These  things  having  been  provided,  and  the  materials 
for  making  the  solution  being  available,  a concentrated  lime-sulfur 
solution  may  be  prepared  as  follows : 

Place  in  the  kettle  in  which  the  lime  sulfur  is  to  be  made  15  gallons 
of  water.  When  the  water  is  hot,  put  into  it  50  pounds  of  lump  lime 
free  from  all  air-slaked  particles.  When  the  lime  is  slaking  vigorously, 
put  into  it  100  pounds  of  sulfur  and  mix  thoroly  with  the  lime,  adding 
sufficient  water  (preferably  hot)  to  keep  the  mixture  in  the  form  of  a 


9 


thin  paste.  As  soon  as  the  lime  is  slaked  and  vigorous  action  has  sub- 
sided, add  sufficient  water  to  bring  the  total  volume  of  the  mixture  in 
the  kettle  to  about  70  gallons.  Keep  the  mixture  at  the  simmering 
point  and  stir  continually  thruout  the  whole  of  the  operation.  The  mix- 
ture is  first  of  a yellow  color  with  a rather  heavy  scum  of  sulfur  float- 
ing on  top.  As  the  action  continues  and  the  lime  and  sulfur  go  into 
solution,  the  scum  disappears  and  the  color  of  the  solution  becomes 
orange  red.  If  at  any  time  during  the  process  of  cooking  the  mixture 
threatens  to  boil  over,  add  a small  amount  of  cold  water.  Occasional 
measurements  should  be  made  with  the  graduated  stick  and  hot  water 
added  from  time  to  time  as  necessary,  so  that  the  volume  at  no  time 
becomes  less  than  66  gallons,  which  should  be  the  approximate  volume 
of  the  finished  product.  When  it  appears  that  there  are  no  particles 
of  free  sulfur  and  lime  present  in  the  kettle,  take  a dipperful  of  the 
mixture,  allow  it  to  settle,  and  then  slowly  pour  it  back  into  the  kettle. 
If  there  are  no  balls  of  sulfur  deposited  in  the  bottom  of  the  dipper, 
the  mixture  has  been  cooked  sufficiently  long,  and  the  contents  of  the 
kettle  should  be  poured  into  a container  and  allowed  to  cool.  When 
cold,  the  solution  should  be  strained  into  the  supply  barrels  and  kept  as 
nearly  air-tight  as  is  possible. 

If  hot  water  has  been  used  to  bring  the  total  volume  of  the  mixture 
in  the  kettle  to  70  gallons,  and  the  other  directions  carefully  followed, 
complete  solution  of  the  lime  and  sulfur  should  be  obtained  with  about 
one-half  hour’s  cooking.  Under  these  conditions  (provided  a compara- 
tively pure  lime  has  been  used)  over  95  percent  of  the  sulfur  should 
be  in  solution,  and  the  amount  of  sludge  should  be  less  than  1 percent. 
The  sludge  is  the  dark  green  matter  resembling  fine  mud  which  settles 
to  the  bottom  of  the  barrel.  It  consists  chiefly  of  calcium  sulfite,  a 
small  amount  of  sulfur,  and  the  insoluble  impurities  which  were  pres- 
ent in  the  ingredients  from  which  the  lime  sulfur  was  made.  If  very 
much  gravel  or  many  particles  of  unslaked  lime  lodge  on  the  strainer, 
it  is  an  indication  that  the  lime  is  of  poor  grade,  and  where  possible 
another  brand  should  be  tried.  The  hydrometer  should  not  be  used  if 
accurate  dilutions  are  desired;  hence  care  should  be  taken  to  have  the 
final  volume  of  each  batch  of  lime  sulfur  approximately  66  gallons. 

Cooking  by  Steam. — Many  growers  whose  orchards  require  the  use 
of  twenty-five  or  so  barrels  of  concentrated  lime-sulfur  solution,  may 
find  it  profitable  to  equip  a steam  plant  for  making  it.  Either  live 
steam,  steam  coils,  or  a jacketed  kettle  may  be  used.  Since  any  one  of 
a number  of  arrangements  for  cooking  lime  sulfur  by  steam  is  satis- 
factory, no  definite  steam  cooking  plant  is  described,  but  only  a few 
general  principles  given  which  apply  to  all.  When  live  steam  is  used, 
it  should  not  be  depended  upon  to  stir  the  mixture,  but  a mechanical 
device  should  be  provided.  The  lime  should  be  slaked  in  a tub  and  the 
sulfur  mixed  with  it  before  they  are  put  into  the  receptacle  in  which 
the  solution  is  to  be  made,  as  the  lime  and  sulfur  cannot  be  thoroby 


10 


mixed  in  a barrel.  To  prevent  unnecessary  handling  of  hot  lime-sulfur 
solution,  the  cooking  vat  should  be  elevated  high  enough  so  that  the 
storage  barrels  may  be  filled  directly  by  gravity.  With  a steam  outfit, 
260  gallons  may  very  easily  be  made  at  one  cooking,  and,  unless  a jack- 
eted kettle  is  used,  a 300-gallon  cask  or  tank  is  advised. 

Crystallization. — Occasionally  a batch  of  lime  sulfur  may  not  be 
properly  made,  with  the  result  that  crystals  form  in  the  solution. 
When  this  occurs,  strain  the  solution  thru  a piece  of  cheesecloth  and 
dissolve  the  crystals  by  heating  with  a small  amount  of  clear  solution. 
Then  add  the  reheated  solution  to  the  rest  of  the  barrel. 

Dilutions. — Properly  prepared  solutions  made  according  to  the 
above  formula  either  by  the  kettle  method  or  by  steam  cooking,  and 
diluted  1 in  20,  give  a spray  material  50  gallons  of  which  will  contain 
nearly  4 pounds  of  sulfur  in  solution.  This  is  the  dilution  which  has 
given  the  most  general  satisfaction  for  the  summer  treatment  of  apples. 
If  a spray  for  use  upon  the  dormant  wood  is  desired  (see  Dormant 
Spraying,  page  15),  dilute  1 in  5,  which  gives  a spray  each  50  gallons 
of  which  contains  about  15  pounds  of  sulfur  in  solution. 

Commercial  Lime  Sulfur 

Prom  the  first,  considerable  difficulty  accompanied  the  use  of  lime 
sulfur  for  spraying  purposes  since  its  preparation  and  application 
proved  such  disagreeable  work.  Under  the  old  formula  it  was  neces- 
sary to  apply  the  mixture  warm,  for  as  soon  as  it  cooled  crystals  sep- 
arated out,  which  lodged  in  the  nozzles,  causing  considerable  annoy- 
ance and  delay.  Naturally,  this  condition  required  that  each  batch 
of  lime  sulfur  be  made  up  immediately  before  application.  This  dis- 
advantage attracted  the  attention  of  manufacturing  chemists,  who  suc- 
ceeded in  compounding  a clear,  storable  lime-sulfur  solution  which, 
diluted  1 in  11,  gave  a spray  comparing  favorably  in  efficiency  with 
the  homemade  product.  In  spite  of  the  high  cost  of  this  original  com- 
mercial product,  there  was  an  ever-increasing  demand  for  it,  and  so 
enticing  was  the  field  to  other  manufacturers  that  a number  of  dif- 
ferent brands  of  commercial  lime  sulfur  soon  found  their  way  upon  the 
market.  Since  most  of  the  commercial  solutions  were  quite  similar  in 
appearance,  it  was  impossible  to  tell  which  solutions  would  be  most 
effective.  Because  of  this,  the  Illinois  Agricultural  Experiment  Sta- 
tion collected  samples  of  the  different  brands  of  lime  sulfur  offered  for 
sale  in  this  state  and  made  chemical  analyses  of  them.  These  analyses 
showed  that  there  was  considerable  variation  in  the  sulfur  content  of 
the  different  brands.  Therefore,  growers  who  intend  to  use  one  of  the 
commercial  solutions  should  purchase  nothing  but  a clear  solution  and 
should  demand  that  the  number  of  pounds  of  sulfur  in  each  gallon  or 
barrel  be  stated.  If  this  is  known,  a spray  of  definite  strength  can 
easily  be  made.  For  summer  spraying,  dilute  so  that  each  50  gallons 


11 


of  spray  as  applied  shall  contain  4 pounds  of  sulfur  in  solution ; if  a 
spray  of  winter  strength  is  desired,  dilute  so  that  each  50  gallons  has 
15  pounds  of  sulfur  in  solution.  Do  not  be  misled  by  a guarantee  of 
a certain  percentage  of  sulfur,  because  such  a guarantee  means  very 
little.  Some  brands  are  guaranteed  to  contain  between  such  and  such 
a percentage  of  sulfur,  and  the  difference  in  some  cases  between  the 
different  percentages  permits  of  a variation  of  nearly  50  pounds  of 
sulfur  per  50-gallon  barrel,  which  is  one-third  of  the  total  amount. 
Growers  are  urged  to  buy  no  solution  which  does  not  contain  approxi- 
mately 135  pounds  of  sulfur  per  50  gallons. 

Lime  Sulfur  Arsenate  of  Lead 

Arsenate  of  lead  should  always  be  used  with  summer-strength  lime 
sulfur  (4  pounds  to  50  gallons)  not  only  for  protection  against  chew- 
ing insects,  but  also  to  increase  the  fungicidal  value  of  the  spray.  In 
making  200  gallons  of  the  spray,  strain  into  the  spray  tank  10  gallons 
of  the  home-concentrated  lime-sulfur  solution,  or  that  amount  of  the 
commercial  solution  necessary  to  furnish  16  pounds  of  sulfur,  and  di- 
lute to  198  gallons.  Start  the  agitator,  and  when  the  lime  sulfur  and 
water  are  uniformly  mixed,  introduce  thru  the  strainer  the  required 
amount  of  arsenate  of  lead  prepared  as  described  on  page  13. 

Self-boiled  Lime  and  Sulfur 

Self-boiled  lime  and  sulfur  is  a special  spray  for  peaches  and 
should  not  be  confused  with  the  cooked  solutions  just  described.  This 
spray  is  a mechanical  mixture ; the  only  heat  employed  in  its  prepara- 
tion is  that  furnished  by  the  slaking  lime.  This  heat  of  slaking  lime 
has  the  faculty  of  breaking  the  particles  of  sulfur  into  finer  divisions 
than  can  be  accomplished  by  means  of  a grinding  machine.  The  mix- 
ture which  has  proved  most  satisfactory  is  one  made  according  to  the 
following  formula : 

8 pounds  of  lime 
pounds  of  sulfur 
50  gallons  of  water 

Extreme  care  must  be  exercised  in  the  preparation  of  this  mixture 
and  the  following  directions  carefully  adhered  to.  A slow-slaking  lime 
free  from  all  air-slaked  particles  should  be  used.  Ground  commercial 
sulfur  which  contains  no  hard  lumps  is  satisfactory.  Where  possible, 
this  mixture  should  be  made  in  200-gallon  lots,  as  the  heat  developed 
in  slaking  8 pounds  of  lime  is  hardly  sufficient  to  completely  break  up 
the  sulfur.  The  equipment  needed  for  making  self-boiled  lime  and  sul- 
fur consists  of  a smooth-bottomed  barrel  or  tub,  a hoe,  paddle,  buckets, 
and  scales.  If  200  gallons  of  the  mixture  are  to  be  made,  place  32 


12 


pounds  of  lime  in  the  barrel  or  tub  with  5 or  6 gallons  of  water.  As 
soon  as  the  lime  is  slaking  vigorously,  put  into  it  32  pounds  of  sulfur. 
The  mixture  should  be  constantly  stirred,  and  more  water  added  as 
needed  to  form  at  first  a thick  paste  of  the  mixture  and  finally  a thin 
paste.  When  the  boiling  has  stopped,  and  before  any  red  or  orange 
streaks  appear,  add  several  gallons  of  cold  water  to  cool  the  mixture. 
Strain  into  the  spray  tank,  using  the  paddle  to  work  thru  everything 
that  will  pass  thru  the  strainer;  then  dilute  to  200  gallons.  The 
mixture  is  now  ready  for  application.  The  agitator  should  be  al- 
lowed to  run  a few  minutes  before  starting  to  spray,  and  should  be 
kept  going  as  long  as  any  spraying  is  being  done,  as  the  mixture 
settles  very  rapidly. 

Self-boiled  Lime  and  Sulfur  with  Arsenate  of  Lead 

It  is  often  desirable  to  apply  arsenate  of  lead  with  self -boiled  lime 
and  sulfur;  and  this  may  be  satisfactorily  done.  After  the  mixture 
is  all  in  the  spray  tank  and  diluted  to  nearly  200  gallons,  start  the  agi- 
tator and  strain  into  the  self -boiled  lime  and  sulfur  the  required 
amount  of  arsenate  of  lead  as  specified  on  page  13. 

INSECTICIDES 

An  insecticide  is  a preparation  used  for  killing  insects.  Insecticides 
are  divided  into  two  classes,  stomach  poisons  and  contact  poisons. 

STOMACH  POISONS 

Stomach  poisons  are  used  to  combat  chewing  insects,  which  live  by 
feeding  upon  the  foliage,  fruit,  or  exposed  surface  of  the  tree.  Under 
this  class  of  insects  may  be  grouped  bud  moth,  leaf  crumpler,  canker 
worm,  curculio,  codling  moth,  leaf  skeletonizer,  tent  caterpillar,  grass- 
hopper, fall  web-worm,  etc.  To  control  these,  the  poison  is  sprayed 
upon  the  tree,  so  that  it  will  be  taken  into  the  stomach  of  the  insect 
with  its  food.  The  two  most  common  stomach  poisons  in  use  to-day  are 
Paris  green  and  arsenate  of  lead. 

Paris  Green 

For  a number  of  years  Paris  green  was  the  most  commonly  used  of 
all  arsenical  poisons,  and  today  is  the  standard  treatment  for  combat- 
ing insects  attacking  certain  plants.  Paris  green  is  copper-aceto- 
arsenite.  The  commercial  product  should  contain  at  least  50  percent 
of  arsenious  oxid  in  combination  with  the  copper  oxid  and  acetic 
acid.  Water-soluble  arsenic  is  injurious  to  foliage  and  fruit,  and  not 
over  3y2  percent  soluble  arsenious  oxid  should  be  allowed  in  Paris 
green  used  for  spraying. 


13 


Paris  green  is  usually  applied  in  proportions  varying  from  4 to  8 
ounces  for  each  50  gallons  of  water  or  other  spray  mixture.  The 
standard  Paris-green  mixture,  however,  is  as  follows : 

4 ounces  of  Paris  green 
% pound  of  lime 
50  gallons  of  water 

Carefully  slake  the  lime  in  a small  quantity  of  water  and  dilute 
the  resulting  paste  with  enough  water  to  make  a milk  of  lime  which 
will  pour  readily.  Strain  this  milk  of  lime  into  the  spray  tank  and  di- 
lute to  50  gallons.  Mix  the  Paris  green  in  a pint  of  water  in  a large 
bottle,  and  then  pour  it  into  the  spray  tank.  After  thoro  mixing,  the 
material  is  ready  to  apply. 

Paris  green  may  be  used  with  Bordeaux  mixture  but  should  never 
be  combined  with  lime  sulfur.  To  apply  with  Bordeaux  mixture,  mix 
the  Paris  green  with  the  diluted  lime  from  which  the  Bordeaux  mix- 
ture is  to  be  made  before  it  is  brought  into  combination  with  the  copper 
sulfate. 

Commercial  Arsenate  of  Lead 

During  the  last  few  years  arsenate  of  lead  has  been  substituted  to 
a large  extent  for  Paris  green,  especially  for  use  in  spraying  apples 
and  peaches.  There  are  a number  of  commercial  brands  of  arsenate 
of  lead  for  sale  which  vary  more  or  less  in  composition.  These  may 
be  obtained  in  the  form  of  pastes  containing  about  50  percent  water,  or 
in  the  form  of  powders. 

The  paste  forms  are  rather  thick,  and  before  using  must  be  wmrked 
into  a thin  paste  by  first  adding  only  a little  water  at  a time,  gradually 
working  out  all  the  lumps.  In  order  to  keep  the  arsenate  of  lead  at  a 
known  strength,  it  is  advised  that  it  be  made  into  a thin  paste  of 
a definite  strength  as  soon  as  received.  A very  convenient  way  is  to  put 
100  pounds  of  paste  as  received  into  a 50-gallon  barrel  and  work  it  up, 
using  only  a little  water  at  a time  until  it  is  of  uniform  consistency. 
When  this  is  accomplished,  fill  the  barrel  with  water ; a stock  solution 
results,  each  gallon  of  which,  when  well  mixed,  contains  two  pounds 
of  arsenate  of  lead. 

The  dry  or  powdered  arsenates  of  lead  are  very  easy  to  handle  as 
they  can  be  weighed  or  measured  out  and  placed  directly  on  the 
strainer  while  the  spray  tank  is  being  filled  with  water  or  some  spray 
mixture.  The  agitator  should  be  running  while  powdered  arsenate  of 
lead  is  being  introduced. 

CONTACT  POISONS 

Certain  insects  obtain  their  food  by  means  of  suckling  mouth  parts 
which  they  insert  beneath  the  surface  of  a plant,  feeding  upon  the 
juices  thereof.  Among  this  class  of  insects  are  scale  insects  and  plant 


14 


lice.  To  be  effective  against  such  insects,  the  spray  nsed  must  be  of 
such  character  that  it  will  stop  up  their  breathing  pores  or  corrode 
their  bodies.  Contact  poisons  must  hit  the  insects  themselves. 

Lime  Sulfur 

For  a number  of  years  lime  sulfur  has  been  the  most  satisfactory 
treatment  for  the  control  of  San  Jose  scale.  The  solutions  used  are 
the  homemade  and  the  commercial  lime  sulfurs  described  on  pages  8 to 
11,  both  of  which  are  efficient.  The  strength  of  solution  necessary  to 
be  effective  against  these  insects  is  one  that  is  injurious  to  a tree  in  fol- 
iage, so  that  it  is  necessary  to  combat  them  during  the  dormant  period. 
If  the  homemade  solution  is  used,  it  should  be  diluted  1 in  5,  which 
gives  a spray  containing  about  15  pounds  of  sulfur  in  solution  in  each 
50  gallons.  The  commercial  solutions  vary  more  or  less  in  sulfur  con- 
tent, and  unless  their  composition  is  known,  so  that  they  can  be  accur- 
ately diluted  to  produce  a spray  each  50  gallons  of  which  contains 
about  15  pounds  of  sulfur  in  solution,  to  be  sure  of  applying  a spray 
of  effective  strength  1 gallon  of  the  commercial  material  should  be 
used  in  each  9 gallons  of  the  diluted  spray. 

Nicotine  Solutions 

Some  of  the  plant  lice  become  so  destructive  that  it  is  necessary  to 
combat  them  during  the  growing  season.  Certain  proprietary  nicotine 
solutions  used  in  summer  spraying  have  proved  quite  efficient  in  com- 
bating green  and  rosy  aphis. 


SPRAYING  SCHEDULE  FOR  ILLINOIS  APPLE  ORCHARDS 

The  number  of  pests  attacking  Illinois  orchards  are  many,  but  the 
methods  of  warfare  waged  against  them  are  quite  similar.  The  com- 
mon diseases  with  which  the  grower  should  make  himself  familiar  are 
apple  scab,  apple  blotch,  bitter  rot,  black  rot,  and  sooty  blotch.  Among 
the  insects  are  San  Jose  scale,  canker  worm,  bud  moth,  leaf  crumpler, 
codling  moth,  curculio,  tent  caterpillar,  fall  web-worm,  leaf  skeleton- 
izer,  and  green  and  rosy  aphis. 

Standard  Spray  Mixtures 

Commercial  Lime  Sulfur. — Winter  strength,  1 gallon  solution  with 
8 gallons  of  water ; summer  strength.  1 gallon  solution  with  40  gallons 
of  water. 

Homemade  Lime  Sulfur. — Illinois  formula  (50-100-66),  winter 
strength,  1 gallon  solution  with  4 gallons  of  water ; summer  strength, 
1 gallon  solution  with  20  gallons  of  water. 


15 


Bordeaux  Mixture. — Made  from  4 pounds  copper  sulfate,  4 pounds 
lime,  50  gallons  water. 

Arsenate  of  Lead. — May  be  used  in  combination  with  lime-sulfur 
solution  or  Bordeaux  mixture. 

Nicotine  Sulfate  Solution. — This  spray  is  for  rosy  and  green  aphis. 
Use  at  the  rate  of  1 part  of  solution  to  1000  parts  of  water  or  certain 
spray  mixtures.  This  material  can  be  added  to  the  regular  spray  of 
Bordeaux  arsenate  of  lead,  and  still  retain  its  insecticidal  properties 
without  interfering  with  the  effectiveness  of  the  Bordeaux  arsenate  of 
lead.  It  can  also  be  used  successfully  with  lime  sulfur  arsenate  of  lead. 
Experience  in  Illinois  has  shown  that  it  should  not  be  added  to  arsen- 
ate of  lead  alone.  Be  sure  that  either  Bordeaux  or  lime  sulfur  is  com- 
bined with  the  arsenate  of  lead  before  adding  nicotine  sulfate. 

Dormant  Spraying 

Winter-Strength  Lime  Sidfur. — Apply  during  the  dormant  season 
at  a time  when  the  temperature  is  above  freezing.  This  is  given  as  a 
matter  of  precaution  against,  and  as  a control  for,  scale  insects. 

First  Regular  Summer  Application 

Bordeaux  Mixture  with  1-50  Arsenate  of  Lead.1 — Apply  after  clus- 
ter buds  have  separated  but  before  any  blossoms  have  opened.  This 
treatment  is  the  first  one  for  apple  scab,,and  is  effective  against  bud 
moth,  leaf  crumpler,  and  canker  worm. 

Growers  having  orchards  in  localities  subject  to  infestation  from 
rosy  and  green  aphis  are  advised  to  use  nicotine  sulfate  at  the  rate  of 
1 to  1000  in  combination  with  the  Bordeaux  arsenate  of  lead. 

Second  Regular  Summer  Application 

Summer-Strength  Lime  Sulfur  with  2-50  Arsenate  of  Lead 1 — Ap- 
ply as  soon  as  the  petals  have  fallen.  This  is  the  second  treatment  for 
scab,  and  the  most  important  one  for  codling  moth.  It  is  also  effective 
against  curculio  and  certain  leaf-eating  insects. 

Third  Regular  Summer  Application 

Bordeaux  Mixture  or  Lime-Sulfur  Solution  with  2-50  Arsenate  of 
Lead1 — Apply  shortly  after  the  second  regular  application  and  com- 
plete within  ten  or  twelve  days  after  the  falling  of  the  petals.  This  is 
the  third  treatment  for  scab,  the  first  for  apple  blotch,  and  the  second 
for  codling  moth  and  curculio ; it  is  also  effective  against  certain  leaf- 
eating insects. 

*As  powdered  arsenate  of  lead  has  been  found  to  contain  twice  as  much 
arsenic,  pound  for  pound,  as  the  paste,  it  is  unnecessary  to  usie  more  than  one- 
half  the  amount  called  for  in  the  above  formulas  if  the  powdered  material  is 
to  be  used. 


16 


Orchards  which  are  subject  to  apple-blotch  infection  should  be 
given  Bordeaux  arsenate  of  lead  at  this  time,  unless  the  lime  sulfur  ar- 
senate of  lead  is  to  be  followed  immediately  with  an  application  of 
Bordeaux  arsenate  of  lead. 

Fourth  Regular  Summer  Application 

Bordeaux  Mixture  with  2-50  Arsenate  of  Lead.1 — Apply  about  seven 
weeks  after  the  fall  of  the  petals.  This  is  the  second  treatment  for 
apple  blotch  and  the  first  for  bitter  rot ; it  is  also  effective  against 
second-brood  codling  moth,  late  infection  of  scab,  sooty  blotch,  and 
fly  speck. 

Additional  Treatment 

Spraying  for  Bitter  Rot. — Orchards  subject  to  severe  attacks  of 
bitter  rot  should  be  sprayed  with  Bordeaux  mixture  every  two  or  three 
weeks  thruout  the  remainder  of  the  season,  or  as  often  as  is  necessary 
to  control  bitter  rot. 

Combating  Codling  Moth. — Because  of  the  severe  infestation  of 
codling  moth  during  the  season  of  1914,  growers  are  urged  at  this  time 
to  take  advantage  of  every  known  operation  which  will  aid  in  keeping 
these  insects  in  check.  Since  it  has  been  shown  that  codling  moths  can 
come  at  times  somewhat  irregular  to  their  natural  life  cycle,  it  is  ad- 
visable to  spray  whenever  codling-moth  eggs  can  be  found  in  large 
numbers  on  the  fruit. 

As  a supplement  to  the  spraying,  it  is  advantageous  to  remove  all 
rough  bark  from  the  trees,  thereby  destroying  the  winter  quarters  of 
the  codling-moth  larvae.  After  this  is  done,  paper  bands  should  be 
placed  round  the  trunks  of  the  trees,  which  will  afford  an  attractive 
hiding  place  for  the  larvae,  and  serve  as  a substitute  for  the  rough  bark 
which  has  been  removed.  At  definite  intervals  thruout  the  summer 
these  bands  can  be  examined  and  all  larvae  killed  which  are  found  be- 
neath them. 


SPRAYING  SCHEDULE  FOR  ILLINOIS  PEACH  ORCHARDS 

Dormant  Spraying 

An  application  of  winter  lime  sulfur  (commercial  solutions  diluted 
1 to  8 ; homemade  solutions,  1 to  4)  should  be  applied  to  all  peach  trees 
about  two  weeks  before  the  blooming  stage,  at  the  time  just  preceding 
the  swelling  of  the  buds.  This  treatment  is  effective  against  scale,  but 
is  made  primarily  for  the  control  of  peach  leaf-curl,  which  infects 
peach  trees  in  nearly  every  section  of  the  state. 


*See  footnote,  page  15. 


17 


First  Regular  Summer  Application 

The  first  regular  summer  application  should  consist  of  2 pounds  of 
paste  arsenate  of  lead  and  2 to  3 pounds  of  lime  for  each  50  gallons  of 
water.  This  treatment  is  for  curculio.  It  should  be  made  about  ten 
days  after  the  bloom,  at  a time  when  the  shucks  are  being  pushed  off. 
At  this  time  the  fruit  and  foliage  should  be  thoroly  coated,  but  care 
must  be  taken  to  avoid  drenching,  as  it  is  apt  to  result  in  injury. 

Second  Regular  Summer  Application 

The  second  regular  summer  application  should  consist  of  8-8-50 
self -boiled  lime  and  sulfur  and  2-50  paste  arsenate  of  lead,  and  should 
be  applied  about  four  weeks  after  the  bloom.  This  treatment  is  for 
scab,  brown  rot,  and  curculio. 

In  spraying  varieties  due  to  ripen  within  three  or  four  weeks  after 
this  application,  it  is  advisable  to  omit  the  arsenate  of  lead  from  the 
mixture  so  as  to  avoid  the  presence  of  any  poison  on  the  fruit  at 
picking  time. 

Third  Regular  Summer  Application 

This  application  should  consist  of  8-8-50  self -boiled  lime  and  sulfur, 
and  should  be  made  from  two  to  three  weeks  after  the  second  treat- 
ment. This  spray  is  given  especially  for  brown  rot.  It  should  be 
applied  very  heavily,  care  being  taken  to  coat  the  fruit  thoroly. 

Additional  Treatment 

Further  spraying  with  self-boiled  lime  and  sulfur  may  be  necessary  « 
in  order  to  keep  brown  rot  in  check.  In  years  when  there  are  severe 
attacks  of  this  disease,  it  may  be  found  advisable  to  repeat  the  self- 
boiled  lime  and  sulfur  treatment  at  intervals  of  ten  days  or  so,  up  to 
within  two  or  three  weeks  of  picking  time. 

Orchards  subject  to  serious  infection  of  brown  rot  should  be  in- 
spected frequently,  and  an  attempt  made  to  remove  every  diseased 
peach  to  a dumping  ground  some  distance  from  the  orchard. 


RESULTS  OF  EXPERIMENTS  IN  SPRAYING  APPLE 
ORCHARDS  CONDUCTED  DURING  1914 

TEST  OF  VARIOUS  BRANDS  OF  ARSENATE  OF  LEAD 

In  order  to  determine  the  comparative  efficiency  of  the  different 
brands  of  arsenate  of  lead  used  by  the  Illinois  growers,  in  1914,  a test 
was  made  of  three  powdered  and  four  paste  arsenates  of  lead.  These 


18 


leads  were  tested  under  conditions  as  nearly  alike  as  possible,  and  all 
sprays  were  applied  on  the  same  day. 


Table  1. — Picked  Fruit  from  Black  Ben  Davis  Trees 
Sprayed  with  Various  Arsenates  of  Lead  Combined  with  Lime 


Apples 

Percent 
codling  moth 

Plat 

Treatment 

Application 

Total 

num- 

ber 

Per- 

cent 

No. 

l’s 

Calyx 

Side 

Total 

7 

1-50  Corona  Dry 

1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6 

710 

80 

0.4 

4.3 

4.7 

Check 

No  treatment 

332 

0 

12.3 

85.0 

97.3 

8 

2-50  Corona  Dry 

1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6 

2072 

76 

0.1 

2.0 

2.1 

9 

1-50  Sherwin  Williams 
Dry 

1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6 

1916 

89 

0.5 

5.9 

6.4 

10 

2-50  Sherwin  Williams 
Dry 

1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6 

2641 

80 

0.3 

5.2 

5.5 

11 

2-50  Sherwin  Williams 
paste  

1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6 

2387 

84 

0.2 

4.4 

4.6 

12 

2-50  Grasselli  paste 

1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6 

1162 

73 

4.0 

12.0 

16.0 

Check 

No  treatment 

231 

0 

17.0 

67.0 

84.0 

13 

1-50  Grasselli  powdered. 

- 2,  3,  4,  5,  6 

2688 

46 

4.7 

27.0 

31.7 

14 

2-50  Thomsen  Tri- 

Plumbic  paste 

1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6 

1704 

81 

0.5 

6.3 

6.8 

15 

2-50  Dow  paste 

1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6 

1707 

83 

1 0.0 

3.6 

3.6 

One  pound  of  Corona  or  Sherwin  Williams  Dry  to  50  gallons  of 
water  controlled  codling  moth  very  satisfactorily.  Two  pounds  of 
Sherwin  Williams,  Dow,  or  Thomsen  paste  arsenates  of  lead  to  50  gal- 
lons of  water  were  also  efficient  in  the  control  of  codling  moth.  The 
Grasselli  paste  and  powdered  arsenates  of  lead  controlled  codling  moth 
to  a considerable  extent,  but  were  less  efficient  in  this  experiment 
than  all  the  other  brands  tested. 

SPECIAL  SPRAYS  FOR  CODLING  MOTH 

The  schedule  commonly  followed  by  the  Illinois  growers  was  in- 
efficient in  the  control  of  codling  moth  this  past  year  because  of  the 
fact  that  the  codling  moth  did  not  appear  at  the  usual  periods.  Be- 
cause of  this  condition  two  extra  sprays  were  applied,  one  the  middle 
of  June  and  another  the  last  of  August.  The  value  of  these  sprays  is 
shown  in  Table  2. 


19 


Table  2. — Picked  Fruit  from  Black  Ben  Davis  Trees 
Sprayed  Four,  Five,  and  Six  Times  with  1-50  Corona  Dry 
Arsenate  of  Lead 


Plat 

Treatment 

Application 

Apples 

Percent 
codling  moth 

Total 

num- 

ber 

Per- 

cent 

No. 

l’s 

Calyx 

Side 

Total 

G 

1-50  Corona  Dry  arsenate 
of  lead  with  lime 

1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6 

710 

80 

0.4 

4.3 

4.7 

H 

1-50  Corona  Dry  arsenate 
of  lead  with  lime 

1,  2,  3,  - 5,  6 

496 

51 

8.3 

29.0 

37.3 

I 

1-50  Corona  Dry  arsenate 
of  lead  with  lime 

1,  2,  3,  4,  5 

1360 

48 

11.0 

23.0 

34.0 

J 

1-50  Corona  Dry  arsenate 
of  lead  with  lime 

1,  2,  3,  - 5 

366 

22 

4.9 

51.1 

55.0 

Plat  J,  which  received  the  four  regular  applications  only,  yielded 
fruit  which  was  over  50  percent  wormy.  Plat  G,  which  received  the 
regular  schedule  and  the  two  extra  applications,  yielded  fruit  which 
was  less  than  5 percent  wormy.  These  results  show  that,  regardless 
of  the  seriousness  of  the  infestation,  codling  moth  can  be  effectively 
controlled  by  proper  spraying. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

Agricultural  Experiment  Station 

URBANA,  APRIL,  1912 


CIRCULAR  NO.  161 


GROWING  AND  MARKETING  WOOL 

By  W.  C.  Coffey 


Fig.  i. — A Nine-pound  Fleece  in  Good  Condi- 
tion and  Properly  Tied  with  the 
Flesh  Side  Out. 


Summary 


To  produce  a desirable  quality  of  wool  in  the  condition  most  satisfactory 
to  the  market,  observe  the  following: 

1.  Keep  a flock  uniform  in  breeding.  Page  3 

2.  Keep  a healthy,  well  fed  flock.  Page  4 

3.  Do  not  allow  burrs,  chaff  and  litter  to  collect  in  the  wool.  Page  4 

4.  Keep  the  wool  as  nearly  free  from  dirt  and  dung  as  possible.  Page  5 

5.  Do  not  brand  the  sheep  with  oil  paint  or  pine  tar.  Page  6 

6.  Keep  the  flock  free  from  external  parasites.  Page  6 

7.  Practice  careful  shearing,  such  as  keeping  the  wool  on  a clean  plat- 
form and  avoiding  second  cuts  and  tearing  the  fleece.  Page  8 

8.  Use  care  in  tying  the  fleece.  Remove  all  tag  locks  and  turn  the  flesh 

side  out.  Page  10 

Q.  Use  smooth  twine  not  more  than  one-eighth  inch  thick  and  of  a type 
that  will  not  shed  its  fiber  into  the  wool.  Page  ir 

10.  Pack  fleeces  from  ewes,  lambs,  wethers,  and  rams  separately,  if  pos- 
sible, and  in  no  case  bag  tags  and  wool  from  dead  sheep  in  with  fleeces. 

Page  12 

11.  Store  the  wool  in  a dry,  clean  place.  It  is  preferable  to  pack  it  in 

closely  woven  bags  that  do  not  shed  fiber.  Page  13 


GROWING  AND  MARKETING  WOOL 


By  W.  C.  Coffey,  Assistant  Chief  in  Sheep  Husbandry 


Introduction 

Those  familiar  with  the  ways  of  growing  and  preparing  wool 
for  market  in  the  countries  of  greatest  production  admit  that  the 
United  States  is  behind  in  her  methods.  Since  the  wools  produced 
in  the  farm  flocks  of  the  central  and  eastern  parts  of  our  country 
come  in  direct  competition  with  foreign  wools,  carefully  grown 
and  prepared  for  market,  better  methods  are  imperative  if  satis- 
factory profits  are  to  be  made  on  the  wool  crop.  The  following 
discussion  is  submitted  with  the  hope  that  the  facts  stated  and  the 
suggestions  given  will  assist  in  placing  on  the  market  a better  wool 
product  from  our  farm  flocks. 

To  sell  at  a good  price,  an  offering  of  wool  should  be  uniformly 
good,  which  means  that  it  should  be  even  in  structure,  length,  and 
strength  of  fiber,  and  that  it  should  be  as  nearly  free  as  possible 
from  foreign  matter,  such  as  dirt,  chaff  or  litter,  burrs,  and  tar  or 
paint  marks. 

The  Breeding  of  the  Flock 

If  the  wool  is  to  be  fairly  uniform  in  structure  and  length,  the 
individuals  in  the  flock  must  be  similar  in  breeding.  By  using  pure 
bred  rams  of  the  same  breed  for  a series  of  years,  any  flock  can  be 
graded  up  so  that  the  type  of  wool  will  be  sufficiently  uniform  in 
the  particulars  mentioned  to  satisfy  the  demands  of  the  market, 
provided  proper  attention  is  paid  to  the  fleeces  of  the  rams  pur- 
chased and  of  the  ewes  reserved  for  breeding.  The  ewes  should 
be  alike  in  fleece  characteristics.  In  addition  to  other  very  neces- 
sary requirements  aside  from  wool,  they  should  carry  fleeces  even  in 
quality,  density  and  length.  This  is  not  meant  in  an  absolute  sense, 
for  such  is  next  to  impossible.  It  is  well  known  that  the  wool  is 
almost  never  as  fine  on  the  thighs  as  on  the  shoulders,  and  that  it 
is  rarely  as  long  on  the  underlines  as  it  is  on  midside. 

The  prevailing  blood  in  the  farm  flocks  of  the  Middle  West  is 
of  the  English  Down  mutton  breeds,  such  as  Shropshire,  Oxford 
and  Hampshire.  Any  of  these,  under  favorable  conditions,  pro- 
duces wool  which  will  meet  with  ready  demand.  So  far  as  the 
wool  product  is  concerned,  the  use  of  rams  of  different  breeds  is 
not  only  unnecessary  but  undesirable,  as  it  lessens  its  uniformity. 

3 


4 


Feeding  the  Flock 

Unless  the  animal  is  properly  fed  the  wool  will  not  be  strong 
and  even  in  size.  If  the  food  supply  is  reduced  to  a point 

below  the  normal  demands  of  the  animal’s  body,  the  wool 
fiber  is  reduced  in  diameter  and  a weak  place  is  the  result.  This 
greatly  reduces  the  commercial  value  of  the  combing  wools  such 
as  prevail  in  most  sections  where  farm  flocks  are  kept.  In  the 
process  of  combing,  the  fiber  breaks  at  the  weak  place  and  the 
wool  has  to  be  put  to  some  use  of  less  value.  It  is  therefore  nec- 
essary for  the  owner  to  provide  feed  sufficient  to  keep  his  flock  well 
fed  thruout  the  year. 


Health  oe  the  Flock 

If  the  animal  is  in  poor  health,  the  effect  on  the  growth  of  the 
wool  is  similar  to  insufficient  feed.  Sheep  often  shed  or  slip  their 
wool  as  a result  of  a feverish  condition.  Any  severe  illness  ex- 
tending over  sufficient  time  to  reduce  the  animal  in  flesh  will  al- 
most invariably  cause  a weak  place  in  the  wool.  In  the  production 
of  good  strong  wool  the  health  of  the  animal  is  just  as  essential  as 
proper  feeding. 

Foreign  Material  in  Wool 

While  lack  of  uniformity  in  breeding,  improper  feeding,  and 
disease  each  contribute  to  the  criticism  made  against  the  wools 
produced  in  farm  flocks,  by  far  the  greatest  amount  of  fault  is 
found  because  of  the  foreign  substances  they  contain.  Some  of 
these  substances  get  into  the  wool  while  it  is  on  the  sheep,  while 
others  gain  entrance  thru  faulty  methods  of  shearing  and  pack- 
ing. If  there  is  a great  deal  of  foreign  material  in  wool,  it  is  im- 
possible to  remove  all  of  it  thru  the  process  of  scouring.  If  it 
is  left  in,  the  result  is  a fabric  with  noticeable  defects;  if  it  is 
removed,  it  is  by  treating  with  a weak  solution  of  sulfuric  acid 
and  heating  (a  process  known  as  carbonizing),  which  may  weaken 
the  wool  fibers.  This  not  only  lowers  the  value  of  the  wool  for 
manufacturing  purposes,  but  also  adds  to  its  cost  to  the  manufac- 
turer because  he  has  to  spend  upon  it  the  extra  labor  of  carbonizing. 

Farm  flocks  as  a rule  are  small,  and  in  many  cases  they  are  kept 
to  eat  down  the  weeds  that  grow  in  pastures,  wood  lots,  and 
truck  patches.  After  the  corn  is  harvested,  they  are  usually  given 
a run  in  the  stalks.  In  all  of  these  places  burrs  are  likely,  unless 
the  fanner  uses  care  in  keeping  them  down.  The  cockle  burr,  so 


common  in  nearly  every  locality,  is  very  injurious,  because  it  be- 
comes so  completely  entangled  in  the  wool  that  in  its  removal  fibers 
are  broken  and  small  woody  particles  from  the  burr  are  left  in  the 
fleece.  Not  infrequently  the  statement  is  made  that  sheep  are 
kept  to  gather  cockle  burrs.  Whether  the  statement  is  made  in 
seriousness  or  in  jest,  the  point  in  question  is  that  the  practice 
would  be  a poor  one.  Not  all  the  burrs  are  gathered  by  the  sheep; 
a sufficient  number  for  the  next  year’s  crop  are  left  on  the  infested 
ground,  and  not  all  the  burrs  that  cling  to  the  wool  get  such  a hold 
that  they  will  remain  in  it  permanently.  They  are  dropped  at  vari- 
ous places  over  the  farm,  and  instead  of  an  effective  gathering 
there  is  a scattering. 


Fig.  2. — A Combination  Grain  and  Hay  Rack  so  Constructed  that  Chaff 
and  Litter  Cannot  Fall  on  the  Necks  and  Shoulders  of  the  Sheep. 


Carelessness  in  feeding  causes  a great  deal  of  foreign  material 
to  be  deposited  in  wool.  Racks  for  roughages  such  as  hay,  fodder 
and  straw,  should  be  constructed  so  that  chaff  cannot  fall  out 
and  lodge  on  the  shoulders  and  necks  of  the  sheep.  Barns  and 
lots  should  be  arranged  so  that  it  is  unnecessary  to  pass  amongst 
the  sheep  in  carrying  loose  straw  to  the  racks.  It  is  well  to  remem- 
ber that  the  equipment  necessary  to  keep  chaff  and  litter  out  of  the 
wool,  as  suggested  above,  also  results  in  a saving  of  feed.  Usually 
that  which  sifts  out  and  is  lost  is  the  most  palatable  and  nutritious 
part  of  the  feed;  hence  there  is  good  reason  for  keeping  it  out  of 
the  fleece  aside  from  the  damage  it  does  to  the  wool. 

Care  should  be  taken  to  keep  dirt  and  dung  out  of  the  wool ; 
neither  of  these  damages  wool  as  much  as  burrs,  chaff  and  litter, 
but  they  do  some  damage,  and  they  most  certainly  make  it  less  at- 
tractive to  the  buyer  and  add  to  the  shrinkage  in  the  process  of 
scouring.  Sheep  should  not  be  forced  to  lie  in  mud,  nor  should 


6 


they  be  allowed  to  lie  in  dusty  places.  Those  who  run  their  sheep 
on  plowed  lands  have  difficulty  in  providing  clean  resting  places  for 
them  and  we  cannot  expect  the  wool  to  be  as  clean  as  it  would  be 
were  their  sheep  kept  on  pastures.  Tags  of  dung  in  wool  are  very 
objectionable  to  buyers.  They  are  very  heavy,  and  since  they 
usually  contain  much  moisture  they  often  cause  the  wool  to  mold. 
There  is  no  excuse  for  wrapping  dung  tags  in  wool  if  proper  care- 
is  taken  at  shearing  time,  but  it  is  better  to  handle  sheep  so  that 
comparatively  little  dung  will  cling  to  the  wool.  All  the  sheep  in 
the  flock  should  be  docked,  and,  late  in  the  autumn,  the  wool  should 
be  sheared  off  around  the  dock.  Dung  clings  to  the  wool  only  when 
the  feces  are  soft  or  when  the  animal  is  scouring.  When  the  ani- 
mal scours  it  should  have  a change  of  feed  and  possibly  medical 
attention  so  that  a case  of  chronic  scours  will  not  develop.  If 
these  suggestions  are  put  into  practice,  there  are  not  likely  to  be 
many  dung  tags  at  shearing  time. 

Paint  and  Tar  Marks 

Oil  paint  and  tar  marks  are  very  objectionable  in  wool,  but 
their  use  is  not  common  in  farm  flocks.  They  are  objectionable 
because  they  cannot  be  removed  in  scouring.  The  manufacturer 
is  obliged  to  employ  labor  to  cut  them  out  before  the  wool  is 
scoured.  This  reduces  the  length  of  the  wool  to  such  extent  that 
its  value  is  impaired.  The  paint  and  tar  clippings  are  of  very  low 
value  and  hence  the  objection  to  them  is  thrice  emphasized.  In 
case  it  is  desirable  to  wool-brand,  there  are  marking  inks  or  fluids 
on  the  market  which  do  no  damage  to  the  wool  because  they  come 
out  in  the  process  of  scouring. 

Influence;  or  External  Parasites 

Keeping  the  flock  free  from  external  parasites  does  much 
toward  bettering  the  wool  product.  They  irritate  the  skin  and 
cause  the  sheep  so  much  discomfort  that  they  do  a great  deal  of 
rubbing  against  fences,  barns  and  racks  in  an  effort  to  obtain  re- 
lief. This  tangles  and  breaks  the  wool  and  in  many  cases  pulls  it 
out.  The  fleece  is  left  in  a broken  condition,  which  is  objected  to 
by  the  buyer,  and  it  is  not  possible  to  tie  it  up  in  attractive  condi- 
tion. If  the  flock  is  badly  infested  with  ticks,  the  good  appearance 
of  the  wool  is  lessened  by  the  eggs  and  dead  bodies  of  the  parasites, 
and  their  presence  would  lead  the  buyer  to  suspicion  the  condition 
of  the  wool. 

The  most  common  external  parasites  in  farm  flocks  are  ticks 
and  lice.  These  can  be  kept  down  to  a minimum  by  regular  and 


careful  dipping.  As  a rule  it  does  not  pay  the  owner  of  a farm 
flock  to  make  the  small  quantity  of  dip  necessary  for  his  sheep,  as 
the  proprietary  dips  advertised  in  leading  live  stock  and  agricul- 
tural journals  can  be  had  at  less  expense.  Most  manufacturers 
and  agents  of  proprietary  dips  also  handle  the  equipment  necessary 
for  dipping.  In  case  they  do  not,  they  are  prepared  to  refer  to 
supply  houses  who  keep  such  equipment  in  stock.  To  be  most  ef- 
fective, dipping  should  be  practiced  twice  a year.  The  whole  flock 
should  be  dipped  a few  weeks  after  shearing,  and  again  in  the 
autumn  before  the  weather  is  cold  enough  to  make  the  wet  sheep 
suffer. 

On  rare  occasions  farm  flocks  may  be  infested  with  scabies. 
The  eradication  of  this  parasite  requires  such  care  and  observance 
of  details  that  owners  would  do  well  to  write  to  the  Bureau  of 
Animal  Industry,  Washington,  D.  C.,  for  instructions.  The  Bureau 
has  made  scabies,  or  scab,  a thoro  study  both  in  the  laboratory  and 
in  the  field  amongst  the  large  range  flocks  of  the  West,  and  hence 
is  in  position  to  give  definite  instructions  for  its  eradication. 

Time  of  Shearing 

To  a limited  extent,  the  condition  of  the  wool  depends  on  the 
time  shearing  is  done.  The  normal  time  for  shearing  farm 
flocks  is  from  the  middle  of  April  to  the  middle  of  May,  after 
the  cold  weather  is  over  and  there  have  been  a number  of  days 
too  warm  for  the  comfort  of  unshorn  sheep.  As  a rule  the 
wool  would  be  in  better  condition  if  shearing  were  done  early, 
say  about  March  first.  This  is  true  particularly  of  wool  from 
breeding  ewes.  Where  there  are  barns  and  equipment  for  keeping 
them  comfortable,  it  perhaps  pays  to  shear  them  before  they  lamb. 
Often  a feverish  condition  immediately  after  lambing  causes  them 
to  slip  their  wool,  with  the  result  that  the  fleece  is  broken  and  the 
amount  of  wool  secured  is  less  than  if  the  shearing  were  done  be- 
fore lambing.  Then,  too,  the  growth  of  wool  after  lambing  is 
likely  to  be  weak,  because  much  of  the  ewe’s  energy  is  expended 
toward  the  production  of  milk.  Another  argument  for  early  shear- 
ing is  that  there  are  likely  to  be  fewer  dung  tags.  When  sheep  are 
turned  on  the  fresh  young  grass  in  the  spring,  the  dung  becomes 
soft  and  inclined  to  cling  to  the  wool.  A frequent  objection  to 
shearing  early  is  that  the  weight  of  the  fleece  is  considerably  lighter 
than  it  would  be  later  on,  because  there  has  not  been  enough  warm 
weather  to  cause  the  yolk  (composed  of  oil  and  perspiration)  to 
rise  in  large  quantity.  The  foregoing  statement  is  true,  and  since 
small  lots  of  wool,  such  as  are  usually  offered  from  farm  flocks, 
are  not  purchased  on  the  scoured  basis — i.  e.,  the  percent  of  actual 


8 


wool  in  the  fleece  shorn  from  the  sheep — there  is  legitimate  reason 
for  not  shearing  until  warm  weather.  Even  if  the  wools  in  ques- 
tion were  purchased  on  the  scoured  basis,  another  argument  for 
late  shearing  would  be  consideration  for  the  animal’s  health. 
This  is  an  important  matter  in  those  sections  where  the  spring  sea- 
son often  is  exceedingly  variable  and  the  shelter  is  not  adequate 
for  comfortably  housing  the  flock.  Because  of  sudden  changes 
from  warm  to  cold  windy  weather,  shorn  sheep  are  likely  to  con- 
tract severe  colds,  which  may  result  in  death.  This  is  particularly 
true  of  sheep  shorn  by  machine,  as  this  process  takes  the  wool  off 
very  close  to  the  body. 

Shearing 

Up  to  this  point  we  have  considered  what  the  grower  can  do 
toward  producing  wool  of  desirable  quality  and  condition.  Grant- 
ing that  he  succeeds  in  doing  this,  it  is  necessary  for  him  to  ob- 
serve care  in  shearing  and  in  packing  for  market,  if  his  product  is 
to  find  favor  with  the  manufacturer. 

The  first  requisite  in  careful  shearing  is  to  provide  a clean  place 
to  do  the  work.  A platform  made  of  surfaced  lumber  is  best,  and 
it  should  be  of  sufficient  size  to  insure  that  none  of  the  wool  will 
be  crowded  off  by  nervous,  unruly  sheep.  For  the  amateur  this 
platform  will  be  none  too  large  if  ten  feet  square. 

The  second  requisite  is  to  cut  the  wool  off  smoothly  close  to  the 
body.  The  power  machine  will  cut  closer  than  the  hand  shears, 
but  satisfactory  work  may  be  done  with  the  latter  if  the  operator 
is  careful  and  possesses  some  skill.  It  is  the  tendency  of  the  un- 
skilled shearer,  whether  using  the  machine  or  hand  shears,  to  fail 
to  cut  close  to  the  sheep’s  body.  For  example,  the  shearer  may 
start  to  cut  close  to  the  body,  but  in  advancing  the  shears  he  can- 
not follow  the  shape  of  the  animal,  and  hence  some  of  the  wpol 
is  cut  from  a half  to  an  inch  away  from  the  skin.  He  can,  and 
usually  does,  back  up  and  cut  close  where  he  failed  in  his  first  at- 
tempt. This  makes  what  is  known  as  second  cuts.  Because  they 
are  so  short  they  are  of  low  value  for  manufacturing  purposes.  It 
is  also  obvious  that  the  evil  of  making  second  cuts  makes  the  fibers 
in  the  main  body  of  the  fleece  shorter  and  uneven  in  length,  and 
therefore  less  desirable. 

The  third  requisite  in  good  shearing  is  to  get  the  fleece  off  the 
sheep  without  getting  it  tom  apart.  There  is  a knack  in  holding  a 
sheep  so  it  will  not  kick  and  struggle  violently;  if  the  shearer 
is  fortunate  enough  to  possess  this  knack,  he  is  in  fair  way  to  have 
the  fleece  intact  when  the  operation  of  shearing  is  finished.  It  is 
not  our  purpose  here  to  describe  shearing  in  detail,  but  perhaps  it 
should  be  said  that  our  most  skillful  shearers  set  the  sheep  on  its 


9 


Fig.  3. — In  the  Fleece. 


Fig.  4. — The  Same  Sheep  as  in  Fig.  3 Out  of  the  Fleece,  Showing  a Good 

Job  of  Shearing. 


10 


rump  while  shearing  it.  Its  body  is  tilted  back  towards  the  knees 
of  the  operator  so  that  its  hind  legs  cannot  get  sufficient  contact 
with  the  floor  to  make  effective  resistance.  It  is  the  adjustment  of 
this  position  that  amounts  to  the  knack  in  holding. 

Sheep  should  not  be  shorn  when  the  wool  is  damp  or  wet,  for 
when  packed  in  this  condition  it  will  mold  and  deteriorate  to 
such  an  extent  that  the  fibers  are  weakened. 

Tying  the;  Fleece 

After  shearing,  the  next  important  step  is  tying  the  fleece.  Sev- 
eral things  must  be  done  to  make  this  job  a good  one.  First,  all 
tag  locks  must  be  removed  whether  they  be  of  dung  or  grease  and 
dirt.  Second,  the  fleece  should  be  carefully  rolled  up  by  hand  (not 
in  a wool  box),  with  no  ends  and  stray  locks  protruding,  and  with 
the  flesh  side  out.  Third,  the  fleece  should  be  tied  with  a hard, 
glazed  twine,  not  larger  than  one-eighth  inch  in  diameter.  In  tying 


A b 


Fig.  5. — A.  90  Feet  of  Jute  Twine  Weighing  One-half  Pound,  the  Amount 
Taken  from  One  Farm  Fleece  by  a Prominent  Wool  House.  B.  7^2  Feet 
Paper  Twine,  all  that  is  Necessary  to  Tie  the  Fleece  Illustrated  on 
First  Page. 


11 


the  ends  of  the  twine  especial  care  should  be  taken  to  make  a firm, 
hard  knot  that  will  not  slip. 

The  first  thing  mentioned  with  respect  to  tying  involves  pack- 
ing nothing  but  merchantable  wool  in  fleeces.  Weighty  materials, 
such  as  bricks,  stones,  and  sheep  heads,  should  not  be  rolled  up  in 
fleeces,  and  fortunately  such  instances  are  relatively  few.  But  tag 
locks  are  so  common  that  their  presence  in  fleeces  from  farm  flocks 
is  the  rule  rather  than  the  exception.  The  total  effect  of  such  a 
practice  is  bad.  It  puts  our  wools  in  bad  standing  with  wool  houses 
and  manufacturers.  Long  continued,  it  has  led  to  the  only  logical 
result ; namely,  discrimination  in  price  against  our  wools. 

Careful  rolling,  with  the  flesh  side  of  the  fleece  out,  and  no 
ends  or  stray  locks  showing,  adds  greatly  to  the  appearance  of  the 
fleece.  It  also  prevents  mixing  the  wool  in  different  fleeces;  and, 
by  the  way,  each  fleece  should  be  tied  to  itself.  In  wool  ware- 
houses it  is  a pretty  sight  to  see  the  heaps  of  graded  wool  faced 
with  a tier  of  carefully  rolled  and  tied  fleeces. 

Tying  Twine 

The  use  of  wrong  kinds  of  tying  twine  has  caused  the  manu- 
facturer more  trouble  than  any  other  one  thing,  with  the  wools 
marketed  from  the  farms  of  the  central  and  eastern  United  States. 
A hard,  glazed  twine  should  be  used  in  order  to  avoid  getting  any 
of  its  fiber  mixed  with  the  wool.  During  the  last  three  or 
four  years  paper  wool  twine  has  been  introduced  which  is 
entirely  satisfactory  to  the  manufacturer.  Rough,  loosely  woven 
twine  made  of  vegetable  fiber  is  not  desirable  because  some  of  the 
fiber  gets  into  the  wool.  It  is  impossible  to  remove  it.  It  will  not 
take  the  dyes  used  in  coloring  wool  and  it  is  detrimental  to  the 
strength  and  finish  of  the  cloth.  The  only  way  to  get  rid  of  it  is 
to  pick  it  out  of  the  finished  cloth,  which  is  an  expensive  process. 
Sisal  twine  is  the  most  objectionable  of  all  employed  for  tying 
wool.  The  mills  have  objected  to  it  so  strenuously  that  its  use  is 
being  largely  discontinued.  In  no  event  should  it  be  used;  better 
not  tie  at  all  than  use  it.  There  have  been  placed  on  the  market 
jute  products,  called  wool  twine,  which  are  not  at  all  satisfactory. 
They  are  so  loose  and  rough  that  many  of  the  fibers  cling  to  the 
wool  and  cause  defects  in  the  goods.  Undoubtedly  the  wool  trade 
the  world  over  will  institute  a war  against  this  type  of  twine. 
These  so-called  wool  twines  are  also  unnecessarily  heavy.  The  best 
wool  buyers  object  to  excessive  size  and  length  of  string.  A well 
known  wool  house  in  the  middle  west  informed  the  writer  that 
they  had  removed  more  than  one  pound  of  twine  from  a single 


12 


ABC  D 


Fig.  6. — A.  “India”  Size  4 54,  Desirable  Twine  for  Tying  Wool.  B.  Paper 
Fleece  Twine,  Desirable.  C.  Jute  Twine,  Undesirable.  D.  Sisal  Twine, 
Very  Objectionable. 

fleece.  The  use  of  so  much  cheap  stuff  amounts  to  unfair  packing. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  wrap  the  string  more  than  three  times  around 
the  fleece* — twice  is  usually  sufficient — and  the  size  of  the  string 
should  be  no  greater  than  needed  to  give  it  the  strength  to 
stand  the  strain  of  drawing  it  in  tightly  on  the  wool  for  the  pur- 
pose of  tying.  As  stated  above,  it  should  not  be  more  than  one- 
eighth  inch  in  diameter.  “India”  three-ply  size  No.  4^  is  a type 
suitable  for  tying  wool ; so  are  the  paper  wool  twines.  Some  of 
the  latter,  however,  are  stiff,  and  therefore  difficult  to  tie  in  a 
firm,  hard  knot  that  will  not  slip  and  release  the  wool.  In  selecting 
from  them  care  should  be  taken  to  secure  a kind  that  is  soft  and 
pliable. 

Packing  and  Storing 

When  packing,  the  fleeces  of  ewes,  lambs,  rams,  and  wethers 
should  be  packed  separately.  In  small  flocks  it  is  hardly  advisable 
to  pack  them  in  separate  bags,  but  they  can  be  separated  in  the  bag 
by  sheets  of  stiff,  strong  paper  so  that  they  can  be  easily  sorted  at 


the  market.  A bag  containing  a certain  kind  or  kinds  of  wool 
should  be  marked  so  that  its  contents  are  known.  Tags  and  wool 
from  dead  sheep  should  be  packed  separately.  If  there  are  black 
or  grey  fleeces,  either  they  should  be  packed  separately  or  their  lo- 
cation should  be  designated.  For  example,  a bag  containing  forty 
ewe  fleeces,  two  of  which  are  black,  could  be  marked  as  follows : 
38  white — 2 black. 

If  the  wool  is  not  sold  immediately  after  shearing,  it  should  be 
stored  in  a clean,  dry  place.  It  should  not  be  left  on  the  bare 
ground  even  tho  it  is  placed  in  bags.  It  is  the  better  method 
to  store  and  market  wool  in  bags,  as  it  is  the  more  likely 
to  be  kept  clean.  The  bags  should  be  closely  woven,  so  that  they 
will  effectively  keep  out  dust  and  dirt.  They  should  also  be  of  a 
type  that  will  not  shed  particles  of  fiber  into  the  wool.  The  loosely 
woven  jute  bags  commonly  used  are  satisfactory  in  neither  particu- 
lar. In  Australia  the  bags  or  sheets  are  lined  with  paper  to  insure 
keeping  the  wool  clean.  In  England  and  Scotland  the  bagging  01 
sheeting  is  made  from  selected  fiber  of  the  best  long  hemp,  thoroly 
scoured  after  weaving  and  carefully  examined  before  it  is  cut  up 
into  sheets.  We  must  exhibit  the  same  sort  of  care  if  we  are  to 
keep  pace  with  them  in  the  quality  of  the  product  we  offer  for  sale. 
If  the  clip  is  contracted  for  before  it  is  shorn  and  immediate  de- 
livery is  planned,  it  is  not  necessary  to  bag  the  wool  unless  at  the 
request  of  the  purchaser.  If  it  is  packed  in  a clean  wagon  box 
and  a canvas  is  thrown  over  the  top,  it  can  be  delivered  in  desirable 
condition. 


The  writer  is  fully  aware  that  some  of  the  preceding  sugges- 
tions with  respect  to  growing  and  marketing  will  appeal  to  the 
sheep  owner  as  hardly  worth  while.  Nearly  all  small  clips  are  sold 
to  local  dealers  who  Oftentimes  do  not  discriminate  sharply  in 
favor  of  wool  of  desirable  quality  and  in  good  condition.  The 
man  who  offers  the  good  product  is  discouraged  because  he  secures 
little  if  any  more  than  his  careless  neighbor.  We  must  admit  the 
seemingly  hopeless  condition  of  his  case,  but  it  is  not  entirely  hope- 
less. When  the  majority  of  producers  in  a community  adopt  and 
practice  better  methods,  the  chances  are  that  something  distinctly 
in  their  favor  will  happen.  Some  one  will  find  them  and  reward 
them  for  the  extra  care  they  have  taken.  If  not  that,  wide-awake, 
live  producers  will  find  the  market  that  is  willing  to  pay  for  care- 
ful growing  and  packing. 

Early  in  this  discussion  it  was  stated  that  the  type  of  wool  pro- 
duced  by  farm  flocks  in  the  central  and  eastern  states  comes  in  di- 
rect competition  with  foreign  wools  that  are  carefully  grown  and 


14 


Fig.  7. — Sisal  Fibers  Picked  from  One  Day's  Product  of  a Worsted  Mill. 
There  are  About  11,000  Fibers  in  this  Bunch.  (By  Courtesy  Mr.  Sam- 
uel S.  Dale,  Editor  Textile  World's  Record.) 


15 


prepared  for  market.  These  foreign  wools  are  so  much  better  pre- 
pared for  the  needs  of  the  manufacturer  that  we  cannot  blame  him 
for  preferring  them.  It  is  said  that  worsted  manufacturers  cannot 
use  tags.  If  included  in  fleeces  they  must  either  re-sell  them  or 
stop  buying  fleeces,  and  many  prefer  the  latter  procedure.  After 
buyers  have  turned  in  another  direction  for  their  supplies,  it  is  not 
easy  to  draw  them  back,  and  we  cannot  hope  to  have  them  look  on 
our  wools  with  favor  unless  we  do  everything  possible  to  make 
of  them  what  the  manufacturer  wants.  Let  us  remember  that  any 
one  manufacturer  cannot  use  everything  in  a “tumble  jumble”  of- 
fering of  wool,  and  that  he  therefore  dislikes  it  to  the  point  of 
refusing  to  bid  up  for  it. 

In  these  days  we,  as  producers  of  wool,  are  absolutely  depend- 
ent on  the  market  for  the  disposal  of  our  product.  The  day  of 
homespun  is  gone.  The  world  supply  of  wool  is  limited  to  such 
an  extent  that  we  may  be  confident  of  receiving  a profitable  return 
on  our  wool  crop  if  we  only  do  our  share  in  meeting  market  re- 
quirements. 


16 


Fig.  8. — A Sisal  Fiber  in  the  Warp  of 
Worsted  Cloth.  (By  Courtesy  Mr. 
Samuel  S.  Dale,  Editor  Textile 
World's  Record.) 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  JULY,  1912 


CIRCULAR  NO.  162 
(Second  Edition,  April,  1913) 


CARE  OF  MILK  IN  THE  HOME 
By  B.  R.  Rickards  and'H.  N.  Parker 


Milk  Spoils  Easily 

Unless  the  best  care  is  taken  of  milk  from  the  time  it  is  pro- 
duced until  it  is  used,  it  spoils  quickly  and  becomes  unfit  for 
food.  Clean  milk  keeps  longer  than  dirty  milk,  and  is  a whole- 
some, nourishing  food,  whereas  dirty  milk  frequently  induces 
intestinal  disorders  and  is  very  apt  to  cause  serious  diarrhea  in 
infants.  The  reasons  for  this  are  that  milk  produced  under 
clean  conditions  contains  few  bacteria,  and  that  clean  dairymen 
usually  chill  their  milk  at  once  and  keep  it  cold,  so  that  there  is 
little  chance  for  these  few  bacteria  to  multiply.  On  the  other 
hand,  a dairyman  who  does  not  have  clean  habits  soon  gets  dirt 
and  dung  into  his  milk,  thus  heavily  seeding  it  with  those  germs 
which  cause  rapid  decomposition.  Moreover,  the  dirty  dairy- 
man rarely  keeps  his  milk  cold;  thus  he  gives  these  organisms 
the  best  possible  chance  to  increase  in  numbers.  When  clean 
milk  gets  . old,  it  changes  to  a sour  milk  which  is  perfectly  health- 
ful, but  the  decomposition  of  dirty  milk,  being  brought  about 
usually  by  filth  germs,  causes  harmful  changes. 


2 


Use  Glean  Milk 

The  housewife  should  lake  as  much  pains  to  see  that  she  is 
getting  clean  milk  as  she  does  to  see  that  only  fresh,  untainted 
meat  is  delivered  to  her. 

Glean  Milk  Contains  No  Sediment 

One  way  of  telling  whether  milk  is  clean  or  not  is  to  lift  the 
unopened  bottle  carefully  and  look  at  the  bottom  to  see. if  there 
is  any  sediment  or  settlings.  A better  test  can  be  made  by 
filtering  the  milk  (slightly  warmed  to  hasten  the  process)  thru  a 
thin  pad  of  absorbent  cotton  placed  in  the  neck  of  an  ordinary 
tin  funnel.  It  must  be  remembered  that  cow  manure  arid  other 
tilth  dissolves  fairly  readily  in  milk,  and  that  for  every  particle 
of  dirt  found  in  milk  an  equal  quantity  has  probably  gone  into 
solution  and  thus  become  invisible,  just  as  sugar  dissolves  in 
water  and  leaves  no  trace.  Milk  that  is  dirty  is  unfit  for  food 
It  is  much  more  important  to  secure  clean  milk  than  rich  milk. 

Take  Milk  Into  the  House  Without  Delay 
Keep  it  Cool 

Milk  should  be,  and  in  many  cities  is,  delivered  to  customers 
at  a temperature  of  50°  F.,  or  less.  It  should  be  taken  into  the 
house  at  once  and  put  in  a cool  place,  preferably  into  an  ice 
box.  Milk  that  is  left  out-of-doors  is  exposed  to  dust  blown  in 
from  the  street  that  settles  on  the  neck  and  cap  of  the  bottle. 
Such  dirt  is  partly  composed  of  horse  droppings,  human  sputum, 
and  other  filth.  In  summer,  milk  will  warm  up  quickly  to  a 
point  wriiere  the  germs  increase  rapidly,  causing  the  milk  to 
sour  early,  and,  if  filth  bacteria  are  present,  to  become  unfit  for 
food.  Moreover,  as  the  milk  grows  warm  it  expands  and  leaks 
around  the  cap  of  the  bottle,  thus  attracting  flies  from  the  privy, 
manure  heap,  and  other  filth,  and  possibly  also  inviting  visits 
from  cals  and  dogs. 

In  winter,  milk  keeps  cold  out-of-doors,  but  as  it  freezes  it 
expands  and  forces  out  the  cap,  and  so  it  is  often  exposed  to  the 
dust  of  the  streets  and  to  animals  to  a greater  extent  than  in 
summer. 

If  milk  is  not  delivered  in  bottles,  a Mason  jar,  or  some  other 
covered  receptacle,  should  be  put  out  for  it  to  be  poured  into. 
Do  not  put  out  a pitcher  or  any  other  uncovered  dish. 


3 


Do  Not  Allow  Milk  to  Stand  Round  the  House 
Keep  it  Covered 

Careless  housewives  often  spoil  milk  that  is  delivered  to  them 
in  prime  condition  by  letting  it  stand  for  a long  lime  on  the  din- 
ing table  or  in  a hot  kitchen:  under  such  conditions  it  spoils 
quickly.  Keep  the  milk  covered  so  that  it  cannot  be  polluted 
either  by  the  filthy  fly  or  by  dirt  falling  into  it. 

Keep  Milk  as  Cold  as  Possible 

The  colder  milk  is  kept,  the  longer  it  will  remain  sweet. 
Bacteria  are  responsible  for  the  changes  which  take  place,  and 
bacteria  increase  in  numbers  very  slowly  at  low  temperatures. 
Therefore,  do  not  leave  milk  where  it  will  get  warm.  If  possi- 
ble, put  it  directly  against  the  ice.  If  this  cannot  be  done,  put  it 
in  the  compartment  of  the  ice  box  directly  beneath  the  ice,  for 
the  air  circulating  thru  the  ice  chest  is  coldest  directly  after  it 
passes  over  the  ice.  If  no  ice  box  is  used,  keep  the  milk  as  cool 
as  possible  by  putting  it  in  the  cellar,  or  by  wrapping  the  bottle 
in  a damp  cloth  and  setting,  it  out  of  the  direct  sunlight  in  a 
current  of  air. 

Keep  Milk  Away  From  Odors 

Milk  absorbs  odors  very  easily,  and  so  it  should  no  the  placed 
in  the  same  compartment  with  onions,  strawberries,  or  other 
food  having  marked  odors. 

Keep  the  refrigerator  very  clean  and  see  that  the  drain  pipe 
and  the  shelf  which  catches  the  drip  from  the  ice  are  kept  free 
from  slime.  Brushes  are  made  especially  for  cleaning  the  drain 
pipes  of  ice  boxes. 

Milk  that  is  kept  covered  absorbs  odors  less  easily  than  that 
which  is  not.  Keep  the  cap  on  the  milk  bottle  while  it  is  in  the 
ice  box  unless  the  cap  is  torn  or  dirty,  in  which  case  a tumbler 
or  cup  may  be  inverted  over  the  mouth  of  the  bottle. 

Wipe  Off  the  Gap  and  Neck  of  the  Bottle 
Before  Opening  it 

The  top  of  the  milk  bottle  is  exposed  to  dirt,  dust,  and  flies 
during  transportation,  and  has  been  handled,  moreover,  by  the 
driver,  whose  hands  cannot  well  be  kept  clean  while  he  is  on  the 
route.  For  these  reasons  the  cap  and  neck  of  the  bottle  should  be 
carefully  wiped  off  with  a clean  cloth  before  the  cap  is  removed. 


4 


Care  of  Milk  Bottles 

Milk  bottles,  after  being  emptied,  should  be  washed  first  in 
cold  and  then  in  warm  water.  Fill  the  bottle  half  full  of  water, 
put  the  palm  of  the  hand  over  the  mouth  of  the  bottle  and  shake 
it  vigorously.  All  dairymen  wash  their  bottles  at  the  dairy,  but 
unless  they  are  rinsed  thoroly  in  the  home  it  is  very  diffi- 
cult to  remove  the  film  of  milk  that  sticks  to  the  glass. 

Milk  bottles  should  be  used  for  milk  only.  To  put  vinegar, 
molasses,  kerosene,  dyes,,  or  similar  substances  into  them  is  un- 
fair to  other  customers  and  to  the  dairyman.  The  bottle  that  is 
in  your  home  today  will  be  in  some  other  home  tomorrow.  Do 
as  you  would  be  done  by.  In  some  places  the  use  of  milk  bottles 
for  anything  other  than  milk  is  forbidden  by  law. 

Be  careful  not  to  break  or  lose  milk  bottles,  for  they  are  ex- 
pensive. The  cost  of  broken  bottles  is  borne  first  by  the  dairy- 
man, but  if  many  are  broken  there  is  a tendency  on  his  part  to 
increase  the  price  of  milk  to  meet  this  added  expense. 

Removal  of  Gaps 

Most  bottle  caps  can  be  removed  easily  with  a fork  or  other 
sharp-pointed  instrument,  but  care  should  be  taken  that  the  cap 
is  not  pushed  down  into  the  milk.  The  practice  of  pushing  in 
the  cap  with  the  thumb  is  a filthy  one,  and  so  is  the  habit  of 
drinking  milk  from  the  bottle. 

Keep  Milk  Bottles  Out  of  the  Sick-Room 

Milk  bottles  should  never  be  taken  into  the  sick-room,  for 
they  are  easily  infected  there  and  may  carry  contagion  not  only 
to  other  members  of  the  family  but  to  other  families.  Neither 
should  milk  that  has  been  in  the  sick-room  be  used  by  well 
members  of  the  family,  for  it  is  very  easily  infected  with  disease 
organisms  which  multiply  therein,  and  is  therefore  peculiarly 
likely  to  serve  as  a carrier  of  communicable  disease. 

If  an  infectious  disease  appears  in  the  home,  do  not  permit 
the  milkman  to  leave  milk  bottles,  but  put  out  a covered  dish  in- 
to which  the  milk  can  be  poured.  Infected  milk  bottles  have 
been  the  cause  of  many  epidemics. 


5 


Store  Milk 

If  you  buy  milk  at  a store,  be  sure  that  it  is  fresh,  that  it 
has  been  kept  in  a clean  place,  that  it  has  been  kept  cold,  and 
that  the  measure  and  other  milk  receptacles  have  not  been  left 
exposed  to  flies  and  dust.  If  milk  is  sold  in  bottles,  there  is  less 
likelihood  of  its  being  harmed  or  infected  by  careless  handling 
than  if  it  is  sold  from  a dip  tank.  In  some  cities  the  laws  do  not 
permit  the  sale  of  “loose”  milk. 

Conditions  about  dip  tanks  are  sometimes  very  bad.  In- 
stances of  milk  being  sold  from  dip  tanks  that  have  a heavy  sedi- 
ment of  dirt  on  the  bottom,  a cheesy  slime  on  the  sides,  and  ill 
fitting  covers  that  admit  flies  occur  too  often.  Moreover,  the 
dippers  are  often  foul.  If  the  salesman  dips  into  the  milk  too 
far,  his  fingers  are  likely  to.  be  washed  in  the  milk,  and  if  he  fills 
the  customer’s  bottle  or  dish  too  full  while  holding  it  over  the 
tank,  the  milk  runs  down  over  his  hand  and  back  into  the  tank. 

Pasteurizing  Milk  in  the  Home 

All  milk  intended  for  babies  should  be  pasteurized  in  the 
home.  An  ordinary  double  boiler  that  can  be  obtained  at  any 
hardware  store  at  small  cost  furnishes  a satisfactory  way  with- 
out the  use  of  expensive  apparatus.  Proceed  as  follows : 

1.  Fill  both  parts  of  the  double  boiler  with  water.  The 
depth  of  the  inner  compartment  should  be  such  that  when  the 
nursing  bottles  are  placed  therein  the  height  of  the  water  will 
be  slightly  above  the  height  of  the  milk  in  the  bottles. 

2.  Place  the  double  boiler  on  the  stove  and  put  the  nursing 
bottles  containing  the  milk  to  be  pasteurized  in  the  water  of  the 
inner  compartment.  The  tops  of  the  bottles  should  be  tightly 
stoppered  with  clean  non-absorbent  cotton. 

3.  Place  a dairy  thermometer1  in  the  water.  When  the 
temperature  of  the  water  reaches  150°  F.,  remove  the  double 
boiler  to  the  rear  of  the  stove  and  allow  it  to  stand  covered  for 
from  30  to  40  minutes. 

4.  The  milk  must  then  be  chilled  quickly.  Set  the  bottles 
in  a large  dish  pan  or  bread  pan  containing  cold  water.  A single 
bottle  can  best  be  quickly  chilled  by  holding  the  side  of  the  bot- 
tle under  running  water  at  such  an  angle  that  the  milk  is  not 
spilled  nor  the  cotton  plug  wet. 

1 Dairy  thermometers  can  he  obtained  from[any  dairy  supply  house,  and  from  many  drug 
or  department  stores,  at  a cost  of  about  50c. 


6 


5.  As  soon  as  the  milk  is  cold  it  should  be  set  in  the  icebox 
near  the  ice  until  needed.  A full  day’s  supply  may  be  pasteur- 
ized at  one  time  in  the  manner  described,  but  all  pasteurized 
milk  more  than  twenty-four  hours  old  should  be  thrown  away. 

There  are  several  forms  of  home  pasteurizers  on  the  market1. 
One  in  particular  (Freeman’s  pasteurizer)  is  very  convenient,  as 
it  automatically  keeps  the  milk  at  the  right  temperature  for  the 
proper  length  of  time. 

The  Use  of  Vacuum  Bottles 

Vacuum  bottles  may  be  safely  used  for  keeping  milk  cold  for 
many  hours.  They  are  particularly  convenient  for  maintaining 
milk  at  a low  temperature  while  traveling,  and  for  keeping  it 
cold  in  the  bed  chamber,  where  it  will  be  handy  for  the  night 
feeding  of  infants. 

Vacuum  bottles  should  be  used  for  keeping  milk  warm , 
since  in  warm  milk  rapid  growth  of  bacteria  will  inevitably  take 
place  and  cause  the  milk  to  become  unfit  for  food  many  hours 
before  it  sours. 

Visit  Your  Dairy 

Unless  you  live  in  a large  city  where  the  milk  has  to  come  a 
long  distance,  visit  your  dairy  and  see  for  yourself  how  it  is  con- 
ducted. Insist  on  the  wiping  of  the  cows’  udders  with  a damp 
cloth  before  they  are  milked,  and  on  the  milkers  using  covered 
milk  pails.  To  keep  dirt  out  of  milk  is  not  difficult , but  to  strain 
it  out  completely  is  impossible . 

A dairyman  who  knows  that  his  customers  are  likely  to  visit 
him  is  pretty  sure  to  keep  his  cows  and  utensils  clean. 

In  many  of  the  larger  cities,  the  milk  inspector  or  the  health 
officer  can  give  information  as  to  the  sanitary  quality  of  the 
milk  sold  by  the  various  dairymen. 

Glean  Milk  Is  Worth  More  Than  Dirty  Milk 

To  produce  clean  milk  the  dairyman  does  not  need  costly 
apparatus,  but  he  does  have  to  use  more  time  and  labor.  As  a 
result,  it  costs  more  to  produce  clean  milk  than  it  does  to  pro- 
duce dirty  milk.  But  it  is  cheapest  in  the  end  to  pay  a little  more 
for  milk  that  is  known  to  be  produced  under  proper  conditions; 
for  dirty  milk  is  very  likely  to  cause  sickness,  especially  in  chil- 
dren, and  so  is  expensive  at  any  price. 

iWilmot  Castle  Pasteurizer,  sold  by  Wilmot  Castle  Co. . Rochester.  N.  Y;  Walker  Gor- 
don Pasteurizer,  for  sale  at  any  Walker-Gordon  Laboratory;  Freeman  Pasteurizer,  sold  by 
J.  T.  Dougherty,  469  W.  59th  Street,  New  York  City. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  JULY,  1912 


CIRCULAR  NO.  163 


ECONOMIC  FACTORS  IN  CATTLE  FEEDING 

I.  RELATION  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  TO  THE  WORLD’S  BEEF  SUPPLY 


By  Herbert  W.  Mumford  and  Louis  D.  Hall 


Exports  or  Beet  /9!0 

Uf  ///feu  yJlClItZO  m 

Australia  ■ 

/ / ri/  in  \/  m 

mi  m *5.708,000 

— - lx  o 14000 

L/f  (JJ^uLLLy  ■ 

Nctu  Zealand  ■ 

— *£847,000 

Exposes  or  A/i/e  Cattle, MO 

Canada  ■ 

Argentina  i 

Mexico  « 

Uruguay  « 

&PEOO  OOO 

L/  L/.  O'  O'  v — / 

*1400.000 

Summary 


1.  Introduction. — A knowledge  of  market  conditions  and  of  the 

world-wide  influences  that  affect  them  is  essential  to  a thoro  understand- 
ing of  the  principles  of  profitable  cattle  feeding.  Page  3 

2.  Geographical  Distribution  of  Cattle. — Of  approximately  450 
million  cattle  in  the  entire  world,  the  United  States  contains  about  71 
million  (1910) ; but  considering  type  and  size  of  animals,  it  is  estimated 
that  this  country  produces  about  one- third  of  the  world’s  beef  supply. 

Page  3 

3.  Ratio  of  Cattle  to  Population. — The  United  States  contains  .77 
cattle  per  capita,  compared  with  extreme  ratios  of  4.27  :1  in  Argentina 
and  .18 :1  in  Italy.  An  increase  in  population  has,  in  most  countries, 
been  accompanied  by  a still  greater  rate  of  increase  in  number  of  cattle. 

Page  4 

4.  Cattle  in  Proportion  to  Area. — This  country  contains  only  23 

cattle  per  square  mile,  compared  with  164  in  Belgium  and  2 in  Canada. 
The  relative  number  in  Illinois  is  56.  Page  8 

5.  Surplus  of  Cattle  and  Beef. — In  1910  the  leading  live-cattle  ex- 

porting countries  were  the  United  States,  Canada,  Argentina,  Mexico,  and 
Uruguay,  in  the  order  named.  The  leading  beef-exporting  countries  were 
Argentina,  United  States,  Uruguay,  Australia,  and  New  Zealand.  Total  ex- 
ports of  live  cattle  and  beef  in  1910  were  approximately  29  million  dol- 
lars from  Argentina,  24  million  from  the  United  States,  and  11  million 
from  Canada.  In  1905  the  amounts  aggregated  72  million  dollars  from 
the  United  States,  24  million  from  Argentina,  and  15  million  from  Can- 
ada. Page  9 

6.  Distribution  of  Exports. — About  85  percent  of  the  value  of  cat- 

tle and  beef  exported  from  the  United  States  in  1910  was  shipped  to 
Great  Britain.  Page  10 

7.  Growth  and  Decline  of  American  Surplus. — Exports  of  cattle 
and  beef  from  the  United  States  increased  gradually  up  to  1900,  contin- 
ued comparatively  constant  during  the  next  five  years,  and  have  shown  a 
marked  decrease  since  1906.  Unless  a rapid  increase  in  cattle  raising  oc- 
curs in  this  country,  exports  of  cattle  and  beef  must  soon  cease.  Page  10 

Note:  In  view  of  the  rapid  decline  in  production  and  the  present  seri- 
ous shortage  of  beef  cattle  in  this  country,  and  recognizing  the  importance 
of  economic  factors  in  relation  to  the  cattle-feeder’s  problems,  an  attempt 
has  been  made  to  analyze  these  economic  factors  from  the  standpoint  of 
the  beef  producer  and  to  state  the  results  in  such  form  as  to  assist  him 
in  solving  his  own  problems.  This  circular,  treating  of  the  relation  of 
the  United  States  to  the  world’s  beef  supply,  is  the  first  of  a series  which 
will  deal  with  other  aspects  of  the  subject,  including  Argentina  as  a fac- 
tor in  international  beef  trade,  beef  production  in  the  United  States, 
cattle  feeding  conditions  in  the  corn  belt,  and  cattle  feeding  in  its  rela- 
tions to  farm  management  and  soil  fertility. 


RELATION  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  TO 
THE  WORLD’S  BEEF  SUPPLY 


By  Herbert  W.  Mumford,  Chief  in  Animal  Husbandry,  arid 
I ouis  D.  Hall,  Assistant  Chief  in  Animal  Husbandry 

Market  conditions  have  a peculiarly  important  bearing  upon 
the  cattle-feeding  business.  A knowledge  of  these  conditions  and 
of  the  factors  which  affect  them  is  essential  to  a thoro  under- 
standing of  the  principles  of  profitable  cattle  feeding.  A clear 
conception  of  the  world-wide  influences  that  govern  supply  and 
demand  will  aid  materially  in  forming  a correct  estimale  of  pres- 
ent conditions  and  future  tendencies  in  our  own  country.  It  is 
therefore  appropriate  to  consider  at  the  outset  the  world’s  sup- 
ply of  cal  lie  and  our  relations  thereto. 

Geographical  Distribution  op  Cattle 

In  the  following  table  are  given  enumerations  of  cattle  in 
the  countries  indicated,  in  round  numbers. 

Certain  allowances  must  be  made  in  considering  these  fig- 
ures. The  cattle  of  British  India,  for  instance,  are  not  commonly 
used  for  beef,  but  consist  chiefly  of  water  buffalo,  which  are  kept 
as  work  animals.  In  some  other  countries  cattle  are  used  only 
for  milk  or  work,  and  may  therefore  be  largely  disregarded  in 
the  present  connection.  It  is  estimated  that  the  total  number  of 
cattle  kept  chiefly  or  largely  for  beef  production  is  approximately 
Table  1.— Number  of  Cattle  by  Countries 


Country 

Year 

Total  cattle1 

Percent 

British  India 

1909 

108  000  000 

24 

United  States 

1910 

71  000  000 

16 

Russia 

1908 

47  000  000 

10 

Argentina 

1908 

29  000  000 

6 

Brazil.  

19082 

25  000  000 

6 

Germany 

1907 

21  000  000 

5 

Austria-Hungary 

1908 

18  000  000 

4 

France . . 

1909 

14  000  000 

3 

United  Kingdom 

1910 

12  000  000 

3 

Australia 

1909 

11  000  000 

2 

Canada 

1910 

7 000  000 

. 2 

Other  Countries 

85  000  000 

19 

Total 

448  000  000 

100 

Ju.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr. , Yearbook  1910,  pp.  615—20. 
Estimated. 


/ 


3 


4 


300,000,000;  hence  the  United  States  possesses  nearly  one-fonrth 
the  number  of  beef  cattle  in  the  entire  world.  Considering  size 
and  type  of  cattle  it  may  be  stated  that  Ihis  country  produces 
approximately  one-third  of  the  world’s  supply  of  beef. 

Cattle  and  Population 

The  number  of  cattle  in  various  countries  in  proportion  to 
population  is  shown  graphically  in  Fig.  2. 

Both  .beef,  milk,  ana  draft  cattle  are  represented  in  this 
diagram.  It  is  impossible  to  differentiate  sharply  between  spe- 
cial-purpose beef  cattle  and  others,  since  milk  and  draft  cattle 
are  usually  used  ultimately  as  beef. 

The  large  relative  numbers  of  cattle  in  Soulh  American 
countries,  Australia,  and  Canada,  are  explained  by  the  small 
population  of  these  countries  in  proportion  to  their  vast  areas. 
In  Denmark,  on  the  other  hand,  is  found  a large  number  of  cat- 
tle per  capita  together  with  a dense  population,  due  to  the  sys- 
tematic development  of  intensive  dairying.  The  supply  of  cattle 


5 


Cattle  Pee  Capita 

T\rpicTU  1 T /U 

Australia 

Brazil 

Canada 

Denmark 

— .03 

United  3 fates 

British  India 

mm. 37 

France 

mm  36 

Austria-Hungary 

mm  33 

Germany 

mm  .33 

Netherlands 

m i 30 

Eussia 

mm. £9 

United  Kingdom 

— i 36 

Betgium 

mm. £3 

ltaiy 

m.J8 

Fig.  2.  Relation  of  Cattle  to  Population1 


in  the  United  States  is  greater  in  proportion  to  population  than 
is  that  of  most  European  countries  in  which  agriculture  is  a lead- 
ing industry.  Excepting  Denmark  we  have  more  than  twice  the 
number  of  cattle  per  capita  found  in  any  European  country  for 
which  statistics  are  available.  This  in  part  explains  (he  large 
export  trade  in  beef  cattle  and  beef  which  we  maintained  until 
recently,  but  which  is  now  rapidly  declining,  as  shown  in  a 
succeeding  paragraph. 

It  has  been  asserted  by  some  that  as  population  becomes 
more  dense  live-stock  production  must  gradually  be  abandoned 
in  order  to  render  a larger  proportion  of  the  grain  and  vegetable 
products  directly  availabl6  for  human  food.  It  is  also  believed 
by  many  farmers  that  it  is  impossible,  under  normal  conditions, 
lo  raise  or  feed  cattle  on  land  worlh  $100  to  $200  per  acre. 
Whether  these  statements  are  warranted  may  be  determined  in 
a general  way  by  observing  the  number  of  cattle  in  proportion 


Computed  from  Statistical  Abstract  of  the  U.  S.,  1910,  pp.  33,  42,  672,  732;  Yearbook 
U.  S,  Dept.  Agr..  1910,  pp.  615—20;  Hazell’s  Annual,  1911;  Stateman’s  Yearbook,  1909,  p.  238. 


6 


to  population  in  various  countries  at  different  stages  of  their 
history.1 

Evidently  a dense  population  and  an  intensive  system  of 
agriculture  do  not  necessarily  involve  a decrease  in  the  cattle- 
raising industry;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  appears  to  increase. 
Only  in  Holland,  where  the  cattle  are  chiefly  of  the  dairy 
type,  is  a relative  decrease  noted,  and  this  is  so  slight  as  lo  be 
considered  insignificant.  In  general,  the  value  of  land  increases 
more  or  less  directly  in  proportion  to  the  increase  in  population, 
from  which  it  is  apparent  that  cattle  raising  has  not  been  found 
incompatible  with  high-priced  land  in  the  countries  represented 
above.  Had  it  not  continued  to  be  profitable  as  population  and 
land  values  increased,  it  would  long  since  have  been  discontinued. 
On  this  point  we  may  quote  from  one  of  the  highest  agricultural 
authorities,  Sir  J.  H.  Gilbert1  of  the  Hothamsted  Experiment 


Table  2. — Influence  of  Increasing  Population  upon  Number 

of  Cattle 


Country 

Date 

No.  of 
cattle  per 
capita 

Increase 

Holland 

1850 

.36 

1904 

.30 

-.06 

Belgium  

1856 

.28 

1906 

.25 

-.03 

United  Kingdom , 

1850 

.28 

1910 

.26 

-.02 

Italy 

1852 

.16 

1908 

.18 

.02 

Germany 

1810 

.25 

1907 

.33 

.08 

Denmark  

1881 

.74 

1909 

.83 

.09 

France 

1852 

.16 

1909 

.36 

.20 

Canada 

1871 

.72 

1909 

98 

.26 

United  States 

1867 

51 

1910 

.77 

.26 

Computed  from  data  in  Statesman’s  Year-book.  Statistical  Abstract  of  the  TT.  S..  twelfth 
U.  S.  Census  Report,  Mulhall’s  Dictionary  of  Statistics,  Annual  Cyclopedia,  and  Report  of 
British  Board  of  Agriculture  and  Fisheries. 


7 


Station,  England,  who  said:1 

“As  population  increases  in  proportion  to  area,  there  arises  the  neces- 
sity for  increased  production  over  a given  area.  It  has  already  been 
pointed  out  that,  in  our  own  country,  gradually  a greater  variety  of  crops 
came  to  be  grown;  that  first  leguminous  crops  and  then  root  crops  were 
introduced,  and  finally  the  system  o£  rotation  became  general.  Thus  a 
much  greater  variety  and  a much  greater  quantity  of  home-produced 
stock  foods  became  available,  and  in  time  foods  of  various  kinds  were 
imported  from  other  countries. 

“Somewhat  similar  changes  in  their  food  resources  occurred  in  vari- 
ous parts  of  the  continent  of  Europe;  and,  with  these,  came  the  induce- 
ment, if  not  the  necessity,  to  pay  more  attention  to  the  subject  of  feed- 
ing  With  us,  more  special  attention  was  paid  to  the  improvement 

of  the  breeds  of  the  farm  animals  themselves,  not  only  to  enhance  the 
development  of  the  most  valuable  characters  in  the  final  product,  but  to 
secure  early  maturity,  and  thus  materially  to  economize  the  expenditure 
of  food  in  the  mere  maintenance  of  the  living  meat-and-manure-making 
machine.” 

As  has  been  stated  elsewhere,2  “there  is  a condition  under 
which  it  is  true  that  the  number  of  cattle  per  capita  sometimes 
decreases  while  population  is  on  the  increase;  viz.,  in  the  early 
history  of  a country  when  the  population  is  small  and  extensive 
systems  of  live-stock  production  largely  constitute  the  agriculture 
of  the  country.”  In  Argentina,  for  instance,  population  is  in- 
creasing at  a more  rapid  rate  than  the  number  of  cattle,  and  will 
doubtless  continue  to  do  so  until  a ratio  is  reached  which  more 
nearly  resembles  that  found  in  the  older  agricultural  countries. 
In  the  United  States,  altho  the  ratio  of  cattle  to  population  is  at 
present  apparently  at  a standstill  or  slightly  on  the  decline  it  by 
no  means  follows  that  a continued  decline  is  inevitable.  On  the 
contrary,  considering  the  cattle  per  capita  in  Denmark,  whose 
population  per  square  mile  is  173  as  compared  with  25  in  the 
United  States,  the  possibilities  of  cattle  raising  in  America  are 
evident.  Altho  it  is  true  that  most  Danish  cattle  are  of  the  dairy 
type,  it  is  nevertheless  true  that  Denmark  also  produces  a surplus 
of  beef  cattle,  as  shown  by  the  fact  that  in  1906  she  exported 
105,000  live  cattle  and  26,500,000  pounds  of  beef,3  and  in  1910  her 
exports  of  beef  to  the  United  Kingdom  alone  were  4,737,000 
pounds.4 

UJ.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Office  of  Experiment  Stations.  Bui.  22,  p.  232. 

2 Illinois  Agr.  Expt.  Sta.,  Circ.  140,  p.  5. 

3tU.  S.  Dept.  Commerce  and  Labor,  Statistical  Abstract  of  Foreign  Countries,  p.  210. 

4lU.  S.Xonsular  and  Trade[Ke  ports,  1911. 


8 


Cattle  in  Proportion  to  Area 

The  United  States  produces  a small  number  of  cattle  in  com- 
parison with  Ihe  great  area  of  the  country.  The  figures  given 
below  indicate  clearly  the  undeveloped  state  of  beef  production 
which  we  have  thus  far  reached. 


Cattle  pee 

Square  Mile 

Austria-Hungary  \ 

— - (PA 

■■■■ 

/PI 

Argentina  mmsamm  £6 

Un/fed  5 fa  ten  r.3 

Brazil  mm  3 

Bunn  la  « 6 

Austna/fa  * 4 

Canada  * £ 

Fig.  3.  Density  of  the  Cattle  Supply1 

It  is  seen,  then,  that  there  are  less  than  one-sixth  as  many 
caltle  on  a given  area  in  this  country  as  in  Belgium,  and  less 
than  one-half  the  relative  number  found  in  Italy.  Only  two  of 
the  countries  (Australia  and  Canada)  in  which  beef  production 
is  susceptible  of  large  expansion,  rank  below  the  United  States 
in  number  of  cattle  per  square  mile.  While  it  is  true  that  vast 
areas  of  desert  and  mountainous  lands  partly  account  for  the 
small  number  of  cattle  per  square  mile  in  this  country,  yet  in 
Illinois,  which  contains  but  little  waste  land,  are  found  only  50 
cattle  per  square  mile,  or  but  one- third  to  one-half  the  relative 
number  in  various  countries  of  Europe.  These  figures  should 
furnish  food  for  thought  to  those  who  consider  the  cattle  busi- 
ness overdone  in  the  United  States  and  should  lend  encourage- 
ment to  all  who  are  engaged  in  the  industry. 


iComputed  from  references  cited  on  p.  3. 


9 


International  Trade  in  Beef  Cattle  and  Beef 

The  importance  of  the  United  States  in  the  beef  trade  of  the 
world  may  be  determined  by  comparing  the  surplus  or  exports  of 
live  cattle  and  beef  from  various  countries. 


Table  3. — Exports  of  -Cattle1 


Country 

I 

1900 

1905 

1910 

No. 

Value 

No. 

Value 

No. 

Value 

United  States. 

Canada. 

Argentina 

Mexico 

Uruguay 

397  000 
|206  000 
151  000 
184  000 
61  000 

$30  635  000 
9 081  000 
3 549  000 
2 706  000 
482  000 

568  000 
167  000 
263  000 
! 99  000 
46  000 

$40  598,000 
11  361.000 
4 979,000 
1 090,000 
402,000 

139  000 
157  000 
90  000 
193  000 
2031000 

$12  200  000 
10  800  000 
3 900  000 
2 500  000 
1 400  000 

1 Year  books  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  1900,  1905.  1910;  U.  S.  Dept.  Commerce  and  Labor,  Sta- 
tistical Abstract  of  Foreign  Countries.  Part  III;  and  personal  communications. 


As  an  exporter  of  live  cattle  the  United  States  stands  pre- 
eminent, our  only  near  rival  being  Canada.  Exports  from  Argen- 
tina are  sent  principally  into  adjacent  South  American  countries-. 
The  figures  for  Mexico  represent,  chiefly,  stock  cattle  brought 
into  the  States  to  be  matured,  and  are  therefore  scarcely  compar- 
able with  the  fat-cattle  surplus  of  other  countries.  The  marked 
decrease  in  live-cattle  exports  from  the  United  States,  as  well  as 
from  other  exporting  nations,  during  the  past  five  years,  is 
clearly  shown  by  these  figures.  It  is  due  chiefly  to  the  increased 
domestic  demand  for  beef,  and  consequently  a reduced  margin 
between  prices  at  Chicago  and  at  British  ports.  (See  cover  illus- 
tration.) 


Table  4. — Exports  of  Beef1 


Country 


— 

gentina 
I ted  States 
I'guay 
rtralia 
v Zealand 
Iiada 


1900 

1905 

1910 

Pounds 

Value 

Pounds 

Value 

Pounds 

Value 

93  492  000 
1434  258  000 
127  310  000 
96  216  000 
35  895  000 
5 727  000 

$4  418  000 
37  772  000! 
6 290  000; 
5 529  000 
1 812  0001 
529  000 

398  223  000 
359  247  000 
1 03  050  000 
43  525  000 
17  418  000 
39  688  000 

$18  598  000 1 
31  836  0001 
4 250  0001 

2 150  000 
930  000 

3 631  000 

580  142  000 
127  406  000 
125  450  000 
71  140  000 
56  012  000 
1 312  000 

$25  480  000 
12  196  000 
4 934  000 
3 568  000 
2 847  000 
115  000 

m.  7^,  °f  ‘J°m™er“fncl  Labor.  Statistical  Abstract  ot  Foreign  Countries.  Part 

777T  ' W,0>  P 4431  U-  S-  Dew-  of  Agr..  Bureau  of  Statistics,  13ul.  39- 

personal  communications.  ’ 


10 


Distribution  of  Exports 

The  countries  to  which  beef  cattle  and  beef  products  are 
principally  exported  from  the  United  States  are  shown  in  the  fol- 
lowing table,  together  with  the  relative  importance  of  each. 


Table  5. — Exports  of  Cattle  and  Beef  from  the  United  States,  19101 


Country 

Cattle, 

number 

Beef 

products, 

pounds 

Total 

value 

Percent 

Great  Britain 

122  139 

90  551  837 

$20  596  056 

84.32 

Canada 

10  283 

1 676  773 

453  147 

1.86 

Newfoundland  & Labrador 

5 213  053 

364  264 

1.48 

Germany 

4 150  754 

299  927 

1.23 

South  America 

129 

3 448  541 

298  055 

1.22 

British  West  Indies 

79 

3 146  318 

277  998 

1.14 

Mexico 

5 149 

110  847 

265  958 

1.09 

Belgium 

270 

2 550  879 

250  925 

1.03 

Norway  and  Sweden 

1 409  885 

126  148 

.52 

Cuba 

207 

262  182 

39  218 

.16 

All  other  countries 

1 174 

14  884  506 

1 454  362 

5.95 

Total 

139  430 

127  405  575 

$24  426  058 

100.00 

1U.  S.  Dept,  of  Com.  and  Labor,  Rept.  on  Commerce  and  Navigation,  1910. 


The  importance  of  Great  Britain  as  a factor  in  our  export  beef 
trade  is  here  made  plain,  that  country  taking  about  85  percent  of 
our  total  beef  exports.  Under  their  free-trade  policy  American 
live  cattle  and  meats  are  received  free  of  duty.  Other  European 
countries  bar  our  cattle  and  fresh  beef,  and  their  duties  on  cured 
and  canned  meats  are  so  heavy  as  to  limit  the  trade  to  the  com- 
paratively small  amounts  noted  above. 

Growth  and  Decline  op  our  Beef  Surplus 

Altho  the  United  States  held  first  rank  in  respect  to  exports 
of  cattle  and  second  in  exports  of  beef  in  1910,  the  surplus  is 
now  diminishing  at  a rapid  rate  owing  to  the  rapidly  increasing 
population  and  inadequate  supplies  of  beef  cattle.  The  general 
tendency  of  our  export  beef  trade  may  be  judged  from  the  fol- 
lowing table,  in  which  t,he  decrease  during  the  past  five  years 
should  be  especially  noted. 

The  significance  of  the  data  given  in  Table  6 will  be  more 
readily  seen  by  referring  to  the  graphic  illustration  of  the  same 
data  in  Fig.  4. 


11 


Table  6. — Exports  of  Live  Cattle  and  Beef  from  the  United  States1 


Year 

Cattle, 

number 

Beef, 

pounds 

1851 

1 000 

18  000  000 

1861 

9 000 

26  000  000 

1870 

28  000 

27  000  000 

1880 

183  000 

130  000  000 

1890 

395  000 

354  000  000 

1900 

397  001L 

435  000  000 

1905 

568  000^- 

359  000  000 

1906 

584  000 

414  000  000 

1907 

423  000 

361  000  000 

1908 

349  000 

272  000  000 

1909 

208  000 

183  000  000 

1910 

139  000 

127  000  000 

HJ.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1909,  pp.  608,9;  U.  S.  Report  on  Commerce  and  Navigation, 

1910. 


Fig.  4.  Exports  of  Live  Cattle  and  Beef  from  the  United  States 


From  these  figures  it  is  evident  that  unless  a rapid  increase 
in  cattle  raising  occurs  in  this  country,  we  shall  very  soon  cease 
to  export  beef  cattle  and  beef.  Indeed,  unless  ample  encourage- 
ment is  given  beef  producers,  it  is  quite  possible  that  we  shall 
shortly  become  an  importing  nation,  so  far,  at  least,  as  the  lower 
grades  of  beef  are  concerned.  Small  shipments  of  South 
American  beef  have  already  been  brought  to  New  York,  and  un- 
der certain  market  conditions  this  trade  may  now  be  carried  on 
with  profit. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  SEPTEMBER,  1912 


CIRCULAR  No.  164 

(Reprinted  February,  1915) 


ECONOMIC  FACTORS  IN  CATTLE  FEEDING 


II.  ARGENTINA  AS  A FACTOR  IN  INTERNATIONAL  BEEF  TRADE 

By  Herbert  W.  Mumford 


Large  beef  herds  are  seen  which  are  practically  pure 
bred.  Beef  making  is  a pasture  proposition.  Alfalfa 
grows  luxuriantly,  and  to  any  one  unacquainted  with 
the  possibilities  of  the  country  the  degree  of  fatness 
which  cattle  acquire  without  grain  is  a marvel. 


Summary 


1.  INTRODUCTION. — The  Argentine  Republic  recently  has  superseded  the  United 

States  of  America  in  the  amount  of  surplus  beef  produced  and  sold  abroad.  Recognizing 
the  important  bearing  of  the  Argentine  cattle  industry  upon  foreign  and  domestic  markets 
for  beef  cattle  produced  in  the  United  Stmtes,  the  author,  on  behalf  of  this  experiment 
station,  made  a thoro  investigation  and  personal  inspection  of  beef  production  in  Argen- 
tina. Page  3 

2.  NATURAL  ADVANTAGES  FOR  CATTLE  RAISING.— Climatic  conditions  are 

such  that  cattle  can  be  raised  and  fattened  out  of  doors  without  shelter  and  generally 
Without  shade.  Abundance  of  alfalfa  and  other  nutritious  legumes  and  grasses,  together 
with  cheap  land  and  labor,  makes  it  possible  to  produce  beef  cattle  cheaply.  They  fatten 
readily  without  grain.  Should  corn-fed  beef  become  profitable,  an  ample  supply  of  corn 
can  be  produced.  Page  4 

3.  QUALITY  OF  CATTLE. — Great  improvement  in  the  common  stock  of  the  country 

has  been  effected  by  importations  of  high-class  pedigreed  cattle  from  Great  Britain  during 
the  last  twenty-five  years  and  particularly  during  more  recent  years.  Several  large  beef 
herds  were  seen  which  were  practically  pure  bred.  Page  5 

4.  DISTRIBUTION  OF  CATTLE. — Five  provinces,  Buenos  Aires,  Corrientes,  Entre 

Rios,  Santa  Fe,  and  Cordoba,  known  as  the  pampa  grass  region,  contain  over  80  percent  of 
the  cattle  in  Argentina.  222,000  establishments  occupying  288  million  acres  were  engaged 
in  the  cattle  business  in  1908.  Many  individual  land  holders  and  land  companies  own  very 
large  tracts.  Page  7 

5.  SLAUGHTERING  FACILITIES. — A municipally  controlled  market  and  slaught- 

ering establishment  in  Buenos  Aires  is  creditable.  Efficient  government  veterinary  inspec- 
tion is  conducted.  Convenient  locations  and  sanitary  conditions  have  been  provided,  with 
reference  to  both  local  and  export  beef  trade.  Page  10 

6.  CONSUMPTION  AND  EXPORT. — Approximately  5 million  cattle  were  slaught- 

ered in  1911,  of  which  approximately  one  million  were  shipped  abroad  as  dressed  beef  and 
a considerable  proportion  of  the  remainder  were  prepared  for  export  in  other  forms.  The 
per  capita  consumption  of  beef  is  about  equal  to  that  in  the  United  States.  Exports  of 
beef  have  increased  from  64  million  pounds  in  1885  to  193  million  pounds  in  1900  and 
580  million  pounds  in  1910.  Argentine  grass-fed  beef  sells  in  the  English  market  within 
two  to  five  cents  per  pound  of  corn-fed  beef  from  the  United  States.  Page  10 

7.  DIFFICULTIES  SURROUNDING  THE  INDUSTRY. — British  ports  have  been 

closed  against  Argentine  live  cattle  since  1900  (except  a short  time  in  1903)  owing  to  an 
outbreak  of  foot-and-mouth  disease,  altho  there  is  little,  if  any,  of  this  disease  in  Argentina 
at  the  present  time.  Texas  fever  ticks,  anthrax  or  ‘‘carbuncle,’’  and  tuberculosis  are  prev- 
alent. Droughts  and  locusts  are  plagues  which  are  more  or  less  localized.  Nevertheless, 
cattle  raising  is  a favored  and  favorite  industry  in  the  Republic.  Page  13 

8.  THE  OUTLOOK. — Argentina’s  natural  advantages  enable  her  profitably  to  com- 
pete with  the  grass  cattle  and  lower  grades  of  native  beef  produced  in  the  United  States. 
North  American  corn-fed  beef,  so  long  as  the  supply  lasts,  doubtless  will  continue  to  com- 
mand a premium  over  Argentine  grass  beef  in  the  markets  of  the  world,  but  domestic 
demand  in  the  United  States  will  soon  absorb  practically  the  entire  amount  of  beef  pro- 
duced here,  thus  rendering  foreign  competition  abroad  an  unimportant  factor  in  the 
industry. 

The  chief  concern  of  beef  producers  in  this  country,  so  far  as  Argentine  competition 
is  concerned,  should  be  the  effect  of  possible  importation  of  South  American  beef  to  the 
United  States  upon  the  production  of  beef  cattle  here.  That  corn  and  likewise  corn-fed 
cattle  can  be  produced  in  Argentina,  Uruguay  and  some  other  SoutlvAmerican  countries  is 
an  assured  fact.  The  extent  to  which  it  will  be  fed  to  cattle,  however,  is  limited  by  the 
relatively  small  production  of  corn  and  further  by  the  fact  that  it  is  a new  industry  and 
will  not  gain  favor  rapidly  because  it  involves  more  cropping  and  labor  and  considerably 
more  expense. 

Expansion  of  the  cattle-raising  industry  in  Argentina  has  ceased,  largely  because 
grain  growing  is  proving  more  profitable  than  cattle  raising.  The  beef  product  will  be 
much  improved  but  the  available  supply  for  export  doubtless  will  not  increase  more  rapidly 
than  the  combined  factors  of  increased  population  there  and  among  nations  consuming  her 
surplus  and  the  relative  decrease  of  beef  production  elsewhere.  Again,  the  cost  of  beef 
production  will  increase  with  increased  cost  of  labor  and  land.  On  the  whole  it  is  not 
anticipated  that  the  business  of  raising  beef  cattle  in  the  United  States  will  be  perma- 
nently menaced  by  Argentine  competition.  Pages  14-15 

BIBLIOGRAPHY.  Page  16 

Note. — This  is  the  second  of  a series  of  circulars  dealing  with  economic  factors  in 
cattle  feeding.  (I.  Relation  of  the  United  States  to  the  World’s  Beef  Supply.)  Following 
publications  will  treat  of  beef  production  in  the  United  States,  cattle-feeding  conditions  in 
the  corn  belt,  and  cattle  feeding  in  its  relation  to  farm  management  and  soil  fertility. 


ARGENTINA  AS  A FACTOR  IN  INTERNATIONAL 
BEEF  TRADE1 


By  Herbert  W.  Mumford,  Chief  in  Animal  Husbandry 

Notice  has  been  taken  in  a preceding  discussion  (Circular  163)  of 
the  fact  that  Argentina  now  outranks  the  United  States  with  respect 
to  the  surplus  of  beef  produced,  and  that  the  change  in  relative  posi- 
tions of  the  two  countries  as  beef-exporting  nations  has  occurred  since 
1905.  So  marked  has  been  the  development  of  this  trade  that  the  at- 
tention of  the  entire  world  has  been  called  to  Argentina  as  a rapidly 
growing  and  exceedingly  important  factor  in  the  world’s  supply  of 
beef.  For  many  years  the  United  States  of  North  America  was  the 
chief  factor  in  the  export  trade  of  this  commodity,  and  an  especially 
important  factor  because  supplying  beef  of  high  quality.  Today  the 
Argentine  Republic  must  be  looked  upon  as  the  most  important  factor 
in  the  world ’s  market  as  regards  the  amount  of  surplus  beef  sold ; and, 
furthermore,  the  quality  of  her  beef  product  is  fast  improving. 

Notwithstanding  the  embargo  against  the  importation  of  live  cat- 
tle from  Argentina  into  Great  Britain  which,  on  account  of  foot-and- 
mouth  disease,  has  been  in  force  since  1900, 2 aggregate  exports  of 
cattle  and  beef  from  Argentina  have  risen  from  $8,000,000  in  1900  to 
$24,000,000  in  1905,  and  $29,000,000  in  1910 ; while  corresponding 
figures  for  the  United  States  were  $68,000,000  in  1900,  $72,000,000  in 
1905,  and  $24,000,000  in  1910.  (See  Circular  163.) 

With  only  twenty-nine  million  cattle,  as  compared  with  seventy- 
one  million  in  the  United  States  (1910), 3 Argentina  is  in  a position  to 
maintain  her  export  trade  in  beef  by  reason  of  her  small  population 
(seven  million)  and  the  consequently  limited  domestic  consumption  of 
beef.  Whether  or  not  expansion  of  beef  production  in  Argentina 

JIn  confining  this  discussion  largely  to  the  production  of  cattle  in  Argentina, 
the  writer  does  not  overlook  other  possible  sources  of  beef  in  South  America,  such 
as  Uruguay,  Brazil,  Bolivia,  Paraguay,  Venezuela,  and  possible  others  which,  with 
the  exception  of  Uruguay  and  parts  of  Brazil,  are  only  partially  exploited.  Opera- 
tions in  Argentina  may  be  taken  as  a type  and  indicative  in  a general  way  of  the  de- 
velopment which  is  likely  to  follow  in  other  countries.  Argentina  is  and  will  re- 
main for  some  time  to  come  the  largest  producer  and  most  important  single  factor 
in  the  export  trade  in  beef  from  South  America. 

^Except  a short  period  in  1903. 

3The  U.  S.  Census  Bureau  estimates  the  number  of  cattle  in  the  United  States 
in  round  numbers  at  64  million,  April  15,  1910,  and  67  to  69  million,  June  1,  1910. 
The  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agriculture  estimates  71  million,  Jan.  1,  1910,  and  60  million, 
Jan.  1,  1912. 


3 


4 


takes  place  in  the  future  will  depend  largely  upon  market  conditions. 
In  the  United  States,  on  the  other  hand,  a rapidly  growing  population 
of  92  million  renders  it  doubtful  whether  our  production  of  beef  will 
equal  our  demand  unless  a rapid  expansion  of  the  cattle-raising  indus- 
try occurs  in  the  near  future,  which  is  improbable. 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  not  only  that  the  condition  and  possibil- 
ities of  beef  production  in  Argentina  have  a vital  bearing  upon  our 
beef  trade  in  foreign  markets,  but  also  that  the  Republic  even  may 
become  a competing  factor  in  the  beef  supply  of  our  own  country. 
Recognizing  the  importance  of  this  factor,  the  author,  on  behalf  of  this 
experiment  station,  made  a thoro  investigation  and  personal  inspection 
of  the  beef -cattle  industry  in  Argentina,  upon  which  the  following 
statements  are  based. 

Natural  Advantages  for  Cattle  Raising 

Cattle  raising  for  beef  in  Argentina,  especially  in  the  temperate 
zone,  is  a much  more  favored  industry  than  in  the  United  States.  The 
climate  makes  it  possible  for  the  entire  life  of  the  cattle  to  be  spent  out 
of  doors  without  shelter  and  generally  without  shade  of  any  kind. 
Alfalfa  grows  most  luxuriantly,  and  the  suitability  of  a very  large 
acreage  for  the  growth  of  that  crop  and  of  other  nutritious  indigenous 
and  introduced  legumes  and  grasses,  together  with  cheap  land  and 


Fig.  1. — Baled  Alfalfa  in  the  Stack 


0 


labor,  makes  it  possible  to  produce  beef  cheaply.  To  any  one  un- 
acquainted with  the  possibilities  of  the  country,  the  degree  of  fatness 
which  the  cattle  acquire  on  grass  or  alfalfa  alone  is  a marvel.  Corn 
feeding  as  a supplement  to  pasture  for  beef  production  is  extremely 
rare.  Beef-making  in  Argentina  at  present  therefore  is  practically  a 
strict  pasture  proposition. 

There  is  quite  an  extensive  area  well  suited  to,  and  at  present 
partially  used  for,  the  growing  of  corn,  but  as  yet,  and  probably  for 
some  years  to  come,  this  product  will  be  either  exported  or  used  for 
horse,  dairy  cow,  and  pig  feeding.  Only  the  flint  varieties  are  grown 
generally.  If  the  time  ever  comes  when  slaughterers  will  pay  a suffi- 
ciently high  premium  for  corn-fed  beef,  it  is  believed  the  country  can 
produce  ample  for  this  purpose. 

Quality  op  Cattle 

One  of  the  most  striking  features  of  the  recent  development  of 
beef  production  in  Argentina  is  the  great  improvement  in  quality  or 
breeding  of  the  cattle.  Many  Argentine  estancieros  have  spared  no 
trouble  nor  expense  in  effecting  improvement  of  the  common  stock  of 
the  country.  This  has  been  accomplished  chiefly  by  importations  of 
high-class  pedigreed  beef  and  dairy  cattle  from  Great  Britain.  It  is 


Fig.  2. — An  Argentine-bred  Shorthorn  Bull  that  Would  Find  Favor  in  the 
Show  Rings  of  any  Country 


6 


an  historical  fact  that  the  cattle  breeders  of  Argentina,  and  more 
especially  the  breeders  of  registered  beef  cattle,  have  bought  the  best 
that  Great  Britain  has  produced,  without  much  reference  to  their  cost. 

In  the  herdbook  of  the  Argentine  Rural  Society  in  1909  there  had 
been  registered  about  50,000  pedigreed  cattle  of  beef  breeds,  some 
4,000  of  which  were  imported ; and  not  all  pedigreed  cattle  are  regis- 
tered in  the  Rural  Society’s  book.  During  the  period  from  1880  to 
1907,  16,156  pedigreed  cattle  were  imported  into  Argentina,  14,624  of 
which  were  brought  from  the  United  Kingdom ; and  in  the  two  years, 
1907  to  1909,  over  9,000  head  were  imported  from  England  alone.1 

The  extension  of  fencing  has  been  an  important  factor  in  making 
systematic,  selective  cattle  raising  possible.  At  present,  in  place  of  the 
old  native  cattle,  estancias  are  stocked  with  mestizo  (half  breeds),  and 
in  many  cases  more  highly  improved  stock.  In  several  instances  large 
beef  herds  were  seen  which  were  practically  pure  bred.  Shorthorns 
(more  frequently  called  “Durhams”  in  the  Republic)  are  by  far  the 
most  numerous  and  popular,  altho  some  fine  herds  of  Herefords  and 
Aberdeen- Angus  exist.  Of  the  50,000  registered  cattle  mentioned 
above,  about  37,000  were  Shorthorns,  10,000  Herefords,  and  2,500 
Aberdeen- Angus.  A still  larger  proportion  of  the  grade  cattle  of  the 


Fig.  3. — An  Imported  Shorthorn  Bull  Doing  Service  in  the  Argentine. 
Estancieros  Have  Bought  the  Best  that  Great  Britain  Has 
Produced,  Without  Much  Reference  to  Their  Cost 

^Census  of  the  Nation:  Stock  Breeding  and  Agriculture  in  1908,  Vol.  3,  pp. 
97,  371. 


i 


country  than  of  registered  animals  are  Shorthorns.  There  is  consid- 
erable rivalry  among  the  leading  breeders  of  pedigreed  beef  cattle  in 
their  attempts  to  bring  out  prize  winners  at  the  live-stock  shows,  the 
chief  one  of  which  is  an  annual  exposition  at  Palermo,  Buenos  Aires. 

Of  the  cattle  produced  for  slaughter  the  best  are  sold  to  the 
f?'igorificos,  where  they  are  either  chilled  or  frozen  for  export.  There 
is  no  absolute  standard  set  by  these  establishments  as  to  the  quality 
and  condition  necessary  for  their  trade,  as  considerable  variation  in 
the  quality  and  degree  of  fatness  occurs,  depending  upon  available 
supplies  and  foreign  demand. 

Demands  in  the  way  of  breeding  and  finish  in  cattle  for  consump- 
tion in  the  Argentine  Republic  are  not  exacting,  and  a cheaper,  less 
improved,  half-fat  class  of  cattle  is  slaughtered  to  supply  local  butch- 
ers. Discarded  cows,  young  stock,  and  work  oxen  in  many  instances 
are  important  factors  in  this  trade. 


Fig.  4. — Good  Herds  of  Herefords  are  Occasionally  Seen 


Distribution  of  Cattle 

A statement  of  the  distribution  of  cattle  thruout  the  various 
provinces  of  the  Republic  will  serve  to  show  what  parts  are  considered 
best  adapted  for  cattle  raising.  In  some  instances  these  statistics 


OCEAN 


Fig.  5. — Map  of  Argentine  Republic  Showing  Distribution  of  Cattle 


9 


might  be  misleading ; for  example,  in  the  province  of  Bnenos  Aires  and 
other  favored  sections  of  the  country  still  more  cattle  might  be  kept, 
but  agriculture  is  more  profitable. 

According  to  the  live-stock  census  of  1908  (see  Table  1 and  Fig. 
5),  the  five  provinces,  Buenos  Aires,  Corrientes,  Entre  Rios,  Santa  Fe, 
and  Cordoba  were  the  leading  cattle  sections,  containing  upward  of  80 
percent  of  the  cattle  in  the  Argentine  Republic.  This  portion  of  the 
country,  known  as  the  pampa  grass  region,  is  naturally  the  most 
favored  section  for  grazing,  and  with  the  introduction  of  improved 
beef  cattle  and  of  foreign  grasses  and  legumes,  chief  among  which  is 
alfalfa,  the  industry  has  advanced  rapidly.  Cattle  growing  has  radi- 
ated from  the  pampa  grass  region  with  the  more  extensive  cultivation 
of  alfalfa. 


Table  1. — Number  of  Cattle  by  Provinces  and  Territories,  According  to  the 
Last  Live-Stock  Census,  in  Argentina  (1908)1 


Buenos  Aires 

10  351  000 

Mendoza  

330  000 

Corrientes  

4 276  000 

Rio  Negro  

279  000 

Santa  Fe 

3 413  000 

Catamarca  

268  000 

Entre  Rios  

3 146  000 

Chaco  

265  000 

Cordoba  

2 639  000 

Formosa  

234  000 

S.  del  Estero 

629  000 

Neuquen  

194  000 

San  Luis 

579  000 

Jujuy  

113  000 

Salta  

560  000 

Misiones  

94  000 

La  Pampa  

465  000 

San  Juan  

82  000 

La  Rioja 

417  000 

Santa  Cruz  

25  000 

Tucuman  

404  000 

Tierra  del  Fuego 

12  000 

Chubut  

335  000 

Los  Andes 

Total 

1 000 

29  111000 

Agricultural  and  Pastoral  Census  of  the  Nation  (Argentina)  : Stock  Breed- 
ing and  Agriculture  in  1908,  Yol.  1,  p.  vii. 


The  number  of  establishments  engaged  in  the  cattle  business  in 
1908  was  estimated  at  about  222,000,  and  these  occupied  more  than  288 
million  acres,  or  an  average  of  about  1,300  acres.  Many  individual 
landholders  and  companies  own  very  large  tracts,  a number  of  which 
range  in  size  from  ten  to  fifty  square  leagues  (about  75,000  to  385,000 
acres) . Some  of  the  smaller  esiancias  are  set  largely  to  alfalfa.  These 
extensive  areas  are  stocked  with  literally  thousands  of  cattle.  Besides 
29  million  cattle  in  Argentina,  there  were  in  1908  about  67  million 
sheep,  7 million  horses,  1 y2  million  hogs,  4 million  goats,  a half  million 
mules,  and  285  donkeys.  The  total  length  of  wire  on  grazing  lands 
amounted  to  1,015,500  kilometers  (631,000  miles).1  It  has  been  esti- 
mated that  the  inclosing  of  rural  properties  in  Argentina  during  the 
last  twenty-five  years  has  cost  one  hundred  million  dollars  for  wire 
alone.2 

Uleport  on  “ Cattle  Breeding  in  the  Argentine  Republic,  ” Pan  American 
Union,  Washington,  D.  C. 

*U.  S.  Consular  and  Trade  Report,  Nov.  16,  1910,  p.  621. 


10 


Fig.  6. — Some  Prominent  Breeders  Maintain  Good  Herds  of 
Aberdeen- Angus  Cattle 


Slaughtering  Facilities 

The  municipally  controlled  mataderos,  or  market  and  slaughter- 
ing establishment,  in  Buenos  Aires  is  creditable.  The  government  vet- 
erinary inspection  at  this  plant,  as  well  as  that  at  the  frigorificos  and 
fabricas,  is  to  be  commended  as  contrasted  with  the  slovenly  methods 
in  common  use  in  isolated  sections  where  competent  government  in- 
spection is  unknown.  Ample  provision  has  been  made  for  slaughter- 
ing cattle  for  domestic  consumption  and  for  export,  and  these  estab- 
lishments are  located  conveniently  both  to  care  for  the  bulk  of  the  city 
and  export  trade  and  to  provide  sanitary  conditions.  The  number  of 
packing  houses  owned  and  operated  by  North  American  companies  is 
on  the  increase. 

Consumption  and  Export 

With  its  relatively  large  production  of  beef  and  its  small  popula- 
tion, Argentina  has  a very  considerable  beef  product  for  export.  It  is 
estimated1  that  in  1911  five  million  head  of  cattle  were  slaughtered,  of 
which  approximately  one  million  were  shipped  as  dressed  beef  to 
markets  abroad,  and  a considerable  proportion  of  the  remainder  were 
prepared  for  export  in  the  form  of  canned  meat,  jerked  beef,  beef  ex- 


TJ.  S.  Consular  and  Trade  Report,  May  18,  1912,  p.  669. 


11 


tract,  and  other  products.  Statisticians  differ  as  to  the  per  capita 
consumption  of  meat  in  the  Argentine  Republic,  but  Mulhall1  estimates 
it  at  about  140  pounds  per  annum.  The  per  capita  consumption  in  the 
United  States  is  estimated  at  185  pounds.  One  would  think  from  cas- 


Fig.  7. — Four-year-old  Steers  Bred  in  Northern  Santa  Fe 
and  Being  Finished  on  Alfalfa  Pasture  in  Southern  Santa  Fe 


ual  observation,  however,  that  the  per  capita  consumption  of  meat  in 
the  Argentine  Republic  is  much  larger  than  in  the  States,  and  it  is 
quite  possible  that  the  available  statistics  on  the  subject  are  not  very 
reliable.  At  any  rate,  of  the  total  meat  consumed  in  Argentina  a much 
larger  percentage  consists  of  beef  than  in  the  United  States.  This 
would  be  true  if  for  no  other  reason  than  the  scarcity  of  swine  pro- 
ducts. Relatively  speaking,  only  a very  small  percentage  of  the  meat 
consumed  by  the  better  classes  is  pork  or  bacon.  Mutton  is  used  ex- 
tensively. 

From  some  points  of  view,  it  would  seem  that  the  Argentine  Re- 
public is  not  favorably  located  for  developing  an  extensive  and  profit- 
able export  trade  in  beef.  Closer  study,  however,  shows  that  their 
slaughtering  establishments  can  be  and  are  located  within  easy  access 
to  the  most  favored  cattle-producing  sections,  and  also  at  or  near  sea- 
ports having  direct  and  frequent  communication  with  British  and 


qVlulhall’s  Dictionary  of  Statistics,  1890. 


12 


European  ports.  That  exports  of  beef  have  increased  rapidly  is  shown 
by  Table  2 and  the  accompanying  graphic  illustration  (Fig.  8).  The 
decrease  shown  in  exports  of  live  cattle  is  due,  as  already  stated,  chiefly 
to  the  closing  of  English  ports  against  them. 


Table  2. — Exports  of  Beef  and  of  Live  Cattle  from  Argentina1 


Year 

Beef2 

Cattle 

lbs. 

No. 

1885 

64  280  000 

1890 

88  288  000 

312  1503 

1895 

113  352  000 

408  126 

1900 

193  492  000 

150  550 

1905 

398  223  000 

262  681 

1910 

580  142  000 

90  000 

^rom  Census  of  the  Nation  (Argentina)  1908;  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Com.  and 
Labor,  Statis.  Abstr.  of  Foreign  Countries,  Part  3 ; U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Bureau 
of  Statis.,  Bui.  39;  U.  S.  Consular  Rept.,  Nov.  15,  1910. 

including  chilled,  frozen,  jerked,  and  canned  beef. 

31889. 


Great  Britain  being  by  far  the  leading  buyer  of  dressed  beef,  the 
amounts  shipped  to  that  country  from  Argentina  and  from  this  coun- 
try during  recent  years  are  significant  of  the  trend  of  trade  conditions. 
The  following  table  includes  chilled  and  frozen  beef. 


Table  3. — Dressed  Beef  Imported  into  Great 
Britain  from  Argentina  and  the  United  States1 


Year 

From 

United  States 

From 

Argentina 

cwts.2 

cwts. 

1905 

2 232  000 

2 582  000 

1906 

2 427  000 

2 796  000 

1907 

2 418  000 

2 692  000 

1908 

1 432  000 

3 571  000 

1909 

857  000 

4 208  000 

1910 

477  000 

4 899  000 

1911 

174  000 

6 111000 

Annual  Statement  of  Trade  of  the  United  Kingdom  with  Foreign  Countries. 
2112  pounds. 


These  figures  show  how  rapidly  Argentina  has  practically  monopolized 
the  British  beef  market.  Of  the  total  dressed  beef  imported  by  Great 
Britain  in  1911,  84  percent  was  shipped  by  Argentina  and  but  2 per- 
cent by  the  United  States. 


13 


It  should  not  be  expected  that  the  beef  produced  in  the  Argentine 
Republic  on  grass  alone  will  grade  in  the  market  as  high  as  English, 
•Scotch,  or  corn-fed  beef  from  the  United  States  of  North  America. 


Fig.  8. — Exports  of  Beef  and  of  Live  Cattle  from  Argentina, 
1855  to  1910 


Notwithstanding  this,  beef  is  being  produced,  and  in  the  manner 
spoken  of,  that  sells  in  the  English  market  within  two  cents  per  pound 
of  the  corn-fed  beef  from  the  United  States.  The  bulk  of  the  Argen- 
tine product  sells  at  three  to  five  cents  per  pound  below  North  Ameri- 
can dressed  beef. 

Difficulties  Surrounding  the  Industry 

Some  discouragements  confront  the  Argentine  beef  producer, 
altho  they  may  be  of  quite  a different  character  from  those  elsewhere 
experienced.  For  example,  since  1900,  owing  to  an  outbreak  of  foot- 
and-mouth  disease  and  the  consequent  supposed  prevalence  of  this 
disease  in  the  Argentine  Republic,  the  ports  of  Great  Britain  have 
been  closed  against  the  importation  of  Argentine  live  cattle,  except 
for  a few  months  in  1903.  There  is  very  little,  if  any,  of  this  disease 
in  Argentina  at  the  present  time.  In  fact,  it  does  not  seem  to  be  a seri- 
ous handicap  to  cattle  raising  there,  except  as  mentioned.  Argentine 
cattle  raisers  have  even  gone  so  far  as  to  suggest  the  possibility  of  its 
being  prevalent  in  a herd  without  its  presence  or  effect  being  espe- 
cially manifest.  Other  discouragements  are  found  in  the  way  of  Texas 
fever  ticks,  a form  of  anthrax  commonly  spoken  of  as  carbuncle,  and 


14 


Fig.  9. — Not  Infrequently  Two-year-old  Steers  that  Have  Been 
Largely  Developed  on  Alfalfa  Pasture  Make  Acceptable 
Killers  for  Export  Chilled  Beef 


tuberculosis.  Added  to  these  diseases,  other  obstacles  to  be  reckoned 
with  are  droughts  and  locusts,  which  seem  to  be  more  or  less  localized. 
But  notwithstanding  all  that  may  be  said  with  reference  to  the  dif- 
ficulties encountered  in  cattle  raising,  it  is  still  a favored  and  favorite 
industry  in  the  Argentine  Republic,  as  indicated  by  the  number  of 
men  engaged  in  it  and  their  prosperous  condition. 

The  Outlook 

On  the  whole,  it  appears  evident  that  the  natural  advantages  of 
Argentina  will  enable  her  cattle  products  profitably  to  compete,  as  they 
are  already  doing,  with  the  grass  cattle  and  lower  grades  of  native 
beef  produced  in  this  country.  North  American  corn-fed  beef,  so  long 
as  the  supply  lasts,  doubtless  will  continue  to  command  a premium 
over  Argentine  grass  cattle  in  the  markets  of  the  world.  Altho  Argen- 
tina eventually  may  develop  the  production  of  corn-fed  cattle,  which 
her  soil  and  climate  render  quite  possible,  it  is  probable  that  the  do- 
mestic demand  in  the  United  States  by  that  time  will  absorb,  as  it  in- 
deed already  absorbs,  practically  the  entire  amount  of  beef  produced 
here,  thus  rendering  our  export  trade,  and  consequently  foreign  com- 
petition abroad,  an  unimportant  factor  in  the  industry. 

The  chief  concern  of  beef  producers  in  this  country  should  be,  not 
what  effect  will  South  American  competition  have  upon  our  export 


15 


trade,  but  what  effect  will  the  possible  importation  of  South  American 
beef  to  the  United  States  have  upon  the  production  of  beef  cattle  here. 

That  corn,  and  likewise  corn-fed  cattle,  can  be  produced  in  Argen- 
tina, Uruguay,  and  some  other  South  American  countries  is  an  assured 
fact.  The  extent  to  which  it  will  be  fed  to  cattle,  however,  is  limited  by 
the  relatively  small  production  of  corn  and  further  by  the  fact  that 
it  is  a new  industry  and  will  not  gain  favor  rapidly  because  it  involves 
more  cropping  and  labor  and  considerably  more  expense. 


Fig.  10. — A Former  Californian  ’s  Attractive  Home  in  the  Argentine 


It  it  significant  that  the  expansion  of  cattle  raising  in  Argentina 
has  ceased,  and  largely  because  grain  growing  is  proving  more  profit- 
able than  cattle  raising.  The  beef  product  will  be  much  improved  but 
the  supply  available  for  export  doubtless  will  not  increase  more  rap- 
idly than  the  combined  factors  of  increased  population  there  and 
among  nations  consuming  her  surplus,  and  the  relative  decrease  of  beef 
production  elsewhere.  South  American  beef  surplus  will  be  in  strong 
demand;  obviously  countries  willing  to  pay  the  highest  premium  for 
it  will  secure  it.  Again,  the  cost  of  production  is  sure  to  increase  with 
increased  cost  of  labor  and  land.  Under  such  conditions  it  is  not  antici- 
pated that  the  business  of  raising  cattle  in  the  United  States  will 
be  menaced  permanently  by  Argentine  competition. 


16 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Alfalfa  and  Beef  Production  in  Argentina.  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Report  No. 
77.  By  F.  W.  Bicknell.  1904. 

Animal  Industry  of  Argentina.  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Bureau  of  Animal 
Industry,  Bui.  48.  By  F.  W.  Bicknell.  1903. 

Argentine  International  Trade;  Its  Development.  Pan  American  Union, 
Bui.  85.  Buenos  Aires,  1911. 

Argentine  Meat  Production  and  Export,  U.  S.  Daily  Consular  and  Trade 
Reports  for  1910: 

Cattle  raising,  old  and  new.  Bui.  118,  p.  673. 

Character  and  volume  of  the  trade.  Bui.  114,  p.  605. 

Chilled  and  frozen  beef.  Bui.  115,  p.  618. 

Cold  storage  companies.  Bui.  116,  p.  634. 

Evolution  of  the  beef  industry.  Bui.  115,  p.  620. 

Increasing  prices  and  expanding  markets.  Bui.  115,  p.  617. 

Pastoral  life  in  the  republic.  Bui.  118,  p.  673. 

Present  position  and  outlook.  Bui.  114,  p.  601. 

Rising  price  of  cattle.  Bui.  116,  p.  633. 

Stock  on  the  ranch.  Bui.  119,  p.  684. 

Summary  of  conditions.  Bui.  119,  p.  685. 

Argentine  Plains  and  Andine  Glaciers;  Life  on  Our  Estancia  and  an  Expe- 
dition into  the  Andes.  By  W.  Larden,  London,  1911. 

Argentine  Republic.  Agricultural  and  Pastoral  Census  of  the  Nation; 
Stock  Breeding  and  Agriculture  in  1908.  Yols.  1-3. 

Argentine  Republic.  International  Bureau  of  American  Republics,  Wash- 
ington, D.  C.  (now  the  Pan  American  Union),  Bui.  67. 

Argentine  Republic.  International  Bureau  of  American  Republics,  Wash- 
ington, D.  C.  (now  the  Pan  American  Union).  Review  Bulletin,  July,  1910. 

Argentine  Republic  in  1911.  A geographic,  agricultural-zootechnic  and 
economic  summary.  Pan  American  Union.  Bui.  103.  1911. 

Argentine  Shows  and  Live  Stock.  By  Prof.  Robert  Wallace.  1904. 

Argentine  Trade  Notes.  U.  S.  Daily  Consular  and  Trade  Reports.  Bui. 
118,  p.  669.  1912. 

Argentine  Yearbooks. 

Bibliography  of  South  America,  arranged  by  order  of  dates,  in  Mulhall’s 
Handbook  of  the  River  Plate,  p.  101.  1885. 

Cattle  Raising  in  the  Americas.  Pan  American  Union  bulletin,  April,  1910. 

Handy  Guide  to  the  Argentine  Republic.  Buenos  Aires,  1909. 

Improvement  of  Herds.  Yearbook  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.  1896,  p.  25. 

Live-stock  Breeding  in  Argentina.  South  America  Journal,  London,  Janu- 
ary 14,  1911. 

Meat  in  Foreign  Markets.  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Bureau  of  Statistics,  Bui. 
39,  pp.  65-70.  1907. 

Meat  Making  Prospects  in  Tropical  America.  John  Barrett,  Director  Gen- 
eral of  the  Pan  American  Union.  Breeder’s  Gazette,  Chicago,  December  6,  1911. 

Meat  Supply  and  Surplus.  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Bureau  of  Statistics,  Bui. 
55,  p.  98.  By  Geo.  K.  Holmes.  1907. 

Modern  Argentina.  W.  H.  Koebel.  1907. 

Notes  on  Animal  Industry  of  Argentina.  25th  Rept.,  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Ani- 
mal Industry,  pp.  315-333.  By  Geo.  M.  Rommel.  1908. 

Sketch  of  the  Argentine  Republic  as  a Country  for  Immigration.  Argentine 
Republic,  Dept,  of  Agr.  1904. 

Story  of  an  Estancia.  By  George  Crampton,  London,  1900. 

The  Argentine  Estancia.  By  Fernandez,  Buenos  Aires,  1903. 

Through  Five  Republics  of  South  America.  By  Percy  F.  Martin.  1905. 

Trade  and  Travel  in  South  America.  By  F.  Alcock,  London.  1903. 

Trade  Conditions  in  Argentina,  Paraguay  and  Uruguay.  By  Lincoln  Huch- 
inson.  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  Bui.  31. 


'It  is  as  truly  the  duty  of  science  to  protect  agriculture  from  error 
as  it  is  to  afford  new  truth.” 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  OCTOBER,  1912 


CIRCULAR  NO.  165 
(Fourth  Edition,  Revised,  May,  1913) 


SHALL  WE  USE  “COMPLETE”  COMMERCIAL  FERTILIZERS 
IN  THE  CORN  BELT? 

By  Cyril  G.  Hopkins 
Chief  in  Agronomy  and  Chemistry 


Mr.  H.  R.  S.  of  Livingston  county,  Illinois,  writes  as  follows  : 

“I  have  a question  in  soil  fertility  which  I would  like  to  have  refer- 
• red  to  Doctor  Hopkins. 

“I  find  a sentiment  growing  in  favor  here  for  the  use  of  commercial 
fertilizers.  I know  of  two  corn  planters  sold  here  last  spring  with  fer- 
tilizer attachments,  but  have  been  unable  to  find  out  what  fertilizer  was 
used  in  them.  I also  know  of  some  who  are  using  a special  brand  of 
‘complete’  commercial  fertilizer.  This  is  contrary  to  the  recommenda- 
tions of  our  experiment  station,  I know,  but  I would  like  the  arguments 
summarized  for  and  against  commercial  fertilizers.  Would  the  use  of 
the  more  soluble  fertilizers  be  recommended  for  the  tenant  farmer  who 
leases  from  year  to  year  from  an  improvident  landlord,  but  who  wishes 
to  improve  his  crop  yield  immediately  and  without  leaving  a large  part 
of  his  investment  in  the  ground  for  a possible  successor?” 

This  inquiry,  received  thru  The  Breeder's  Gazette , involves  a 
very  big  and  very  complicated  question,  but  it  is  a question  (hat 
is  already  upon  us  in  the  great  corn-beltslates ; and  it  is  due  both 
to  the  tenant  farmers  and  to  the  landowners  that  the  question  be 
answered  honestly  and  in  the  light  of  the  most  complete  infor- 
mation, in  the  interest  of  food  consumers  as  well  as  of  food  pro- 
ducers. The  real  question  is,  Shall  the  corn-belt  farmer  pay  ten 
times  as  much  as  he  ought  to  pay  for  plant  food  to  enrich  his 


soil?  Shall  he  buy  nitrogen  at  15  to  50  cenls  a pound  when 
the  air  above  every  acre  contains  70  million  pounds  of  free  nilro- 
gen?  Shall  he  buy  potassium  at  5 to  20  cenls  a pound  and 
apply  four  pounds  per  acre  when  his  plowed  soil  already  con- 
tains 30,000  pounds  of  potassium  per  acre,  with  still  larger  quan- 
tities in  the  subsoil ? Because  his  soil  needs  phosphorus,  shall  he 
employ  the  fertilizer  factory  lo  make  it  soluble  and  tihen  buy  it 
at  12  to  30  cents  a pound  in  an  acid  phosphate  or  “com- 
plete” fertilizer  when  he  can  get  it  for  3 cents  a pound  in  the 
fine-ground  natural  rock  phosphate,  and  when,  by  growing  and 
plowing  under  plenty  of  clover  (either  directly  or  in  manure) , he 
can  get  nitrogen  with  profit  from  the  air,  liberate  potassium  from 
the  inexhaustible  supply  in  the  soil,  and  make  soluble  the  phos- 
phorus in  the  natural  rock  phosphate  which  he  can  apply  in 
abundance  at  low  cost? 

The  bigness  of  this  question'can  best  be  appreciated  from  the 
fact  tliat  the  farmers  of  the  United  Stales  paid  out  104  million 
dollars  for  commercial  fertilizers  in  1909,  according  to  the  report 
of  the  United  Slates  Bureau  of  Census;  and  the  complicated  char- 
acter of  the  question  may  be  seen  from  ihe  fact  tliat  there  are  in 
the  United  States  about  550  fertilizer  manufacturers  organized 
chiefly  into  great  fertilizer  trusts  and  employing  thousands  of 
fertilizer  agents,  with  dealers,  traveling  salesmen,  advertising 
men,  etc.,  reaching  into  almost  every  town  and  hamlet  in  the 
United  States.  Even  “leading”  farmers  are  often  commissioned 
to  encourage  the  sale  of  fertilizers  to  their  neighbors,  and  are 
financially  rewarded  both  by  commission  and  by  reduced  prices 
on  fertilizers  purchased  for  their  own  use. 

The  National  Fertilizer  Association  has  also  established  the 
“Middle  West  Soil  Improvement  Committee”  to  encourage  the 
use  of  commercial  fertilizers  in  the  middle  west.  This  commit- 
tee has  established  headquarters  in  Chicago  , and  has  gone  to  agri- 
cultural colleges  and  employed  men  who,  because  of  their  pre- 
vious connection  with  public  institutions,  were  thought  lo  have 
sufficient  knowledge  and  sufficient  reputation  to  bring  large  in- 
fluence to  bear  upon  the  agricultural  press  and  upon  the  agricul- 
tural people  directly,  particularly  thru  the  publication  of  bulletins 
by  the  “Middle  West  Soil  Improvement  Committee”  and  the  giv- 
ing of  addresses  at  farmers’  meetings  where  their  names  might 
be  placed  upon  programs  with  the  title  of  “Professor”  from  the 
“Middle  West  Soil  Improvement  Committee,”  sometimes  with 
the  omission  of  the  fact  that  this  is  a committee  of  the 


3 


National  Fertilizer  Association.  Enormous  sums  of  money  are 
also  provided  to  be  used  in  publishing  and  advertising  and  en- 
couraging the  use  of  ‘‘complete”  commercial  fertilizers. 

It  is  impossible  to  discuss  this  question  intelligently  without 
first  giving  an  explanation  as  to  what  is  meant  by  the  ‘‘com- 
plete” commercial  fertilizer.  A “complete”  commercial  fertilizer 
is  one  which  contains  some  of  each  of  the  three  elements  nitrogen, 
phosphorus,  and  potassium,  which  are  usually  expressed  in  terms 
of  the  compounds  ammonia,  “phosphoric  acid,"  and  potash. 
The  most  common  “complete”  commercial  fertilizer  in  the  United 
States  has  a composition  known  as  2-8-2,  which  means  that  it 
contains  in  100  pounds  the  equivalent  of  2 pounds  of  ammonia, 
8 pounds  of  available  “phosphoric  acid,”  and  2 pounds  of  potash ; 
or,  in  terms  of  actual  plant-food  elements,  one  ton  of  such  fertil- 
izer contains  about  33  pounds  of  nitrogen,  80  pounds  of 
phosphorus,  and  33  pounds  of  potassium;  and,  as  a general  aver- 
age, such  a fertilizer  is  sold  at  retail  for  $20  to  $30  per  ton. 
A fifty-bushel  crop  of  corn  takes  from  the  soil  75  pounds  of 
nitrogen,  12  of  phosphorus,  and  36  of  potassium;  and,  in  pro- 
portion to  the  total  yield,  other  grain  crops  have  approximately 
the  same  requirements.  Such  a crop  would  require  more  than  a 
ton  per  acre  of  such  fertilizer  to  supply  the  potassium,  or  more 
than  two  tons  to  furnish  the  nitrogen,  or  from  $4  to  $6  worth  of 
“complete”  fertilizer  to  provide  even  the  phosphorus  for  one  acre 
of  corn  yielding  50  bushels. 

We  should  also  understand  that  the  air  contains  an  abso- 
lutely inexhaustible  supply  of  nitrogen  wdiich  can  be  freely  util- 
ized by  clover,  alfalfa,  cowpeas,  soybeans,  vetch,  and  other  legu- 
minous crops, — all  of  which  are  well  worth  raising  for  their  own 
sake  because  they  are  valuable  both  for  forage  and  for  seed  pro- 
duction. while  the  nitrogen  which  they  contain  can  be  very  largely 
returned  to  the  soil  either  in  the  manure  produced  by  feeding  the 
crops  to  animals  or  in  the  residues  that  remain  after  the  seed  is 
removed.  This  is  particularly  true  with  the  clover  crop,  the  total 
yield  of  which  may  be  from  twTo  to  five  tons  per  acre,  while  the 
amount  of  seed  itself  may  vary  from  one  to  five  bushels  per  acre. 

The  normal  soils  of  the  north-central  states  contain  an  inex- 
haustible supply  of  potassium,  the  amount  of  that  element 
in  the  plowed  soil  of  an  acre  of  corn-belt  land  being  about 
35,000  pounds,  while  the  subsoil,  which  gradually  becomes  the  top 
soil  wherever  the  surface  drainage  permits  even  slight  washing, 
contains  still  more.  On  the  other  hand,  phosphorus  is  present 


4 


in  normal  soils  in  limited  amounts,  and,  as  a rule,  it  should 
be  purchased  and  applied  in  order  to  positively  enrich  the  soil  in 
that  element.  The  great  source  of  phosphorus  is  the  natural 
phosphate  rock  which  is  found  in  vast  deposits  laid  down  in  beds 
somewhat  the  same  as  limestone.  Immense  beds  of  high-grade 
phosphate  rock  are  found  in  Tennessee,  South  Carolina,  and 
Florida  ;<  and  vastly  more  extensive  deposits  have  been  discovered 
and  quite  fully  investigated  by  the  United  States  Geological  Sur- 
vey in  Wyoming,  Utah.  Idaho,  and  Montana.  From  the  measure- 
ments and  computations  already  made  it  is  safe  to  say  that  there 
are  at  least  5 billion  tons  of  high-grade  natural  phosphate  rock 
in  the  United  States  (enough  for  5 tons  per  acre  for  all  our  farm 
land) , and  probably  the  amount  far  exceeds  this  figure.  In  addi- 
tion, there  are  still  more  extensive  deposits  of  lower-grade  phos- 
phate found  not  only  in  the  states  mentioned  but  in  many  others 
also. 

The  ordinary  “complete”  fertilizer  is  made  by  taking  one  ton 
of  ground  phosphate  rock  and  adding  to  it  about  one  ton  of 
sulfuric  acid  and  two  tons  of  “filler,”  together  with  a small 
amount  of  nitrogen  and  potassium;  thus  producing  four  tons  of 
“complete”  fertilizer  of  the  average  composition  noted  above,  with 
no  more  phosphorus  in  the  four  tons  than  was  contained  in  the 
one  ton  of  raw  rock  phosphate. 

Fine-ground  natural  rock  phosphate  can  be  delivered  at  the 
farmers’  railroad  stations  in  most  parts  of  the  corn  belt  for  less 
than  $8  per  ton,  while  the  four  tons  of  “complete”  fertilizer 
containing  the  same  amount  of  phosphorus  would  cost  the 
same  farmer  more  than  $80,  as  an  average.  About  a year 
ago  I found  one  farmer  in  Illinois  who  had  purchased  four 
tons  of  such  a “complete”  fertilizer  at  a cost  of  $114  ($28.50  per 
ton) , whereas  for  $7  he  could  have  purchased  in  raw  rock  phos- 
phate delivered  at  his  railroad  station  the  same  amount  of  phos- 
phorus as  was  contained  in  the  four  tons  of  “complete”  fertilizer ; 
and  long  continued  investigations  clearly  establish  the  fact  that 
by  growingand  plowing  under  leguminous  crops,  either  directly 
or  in  manure,  he  could  have  secured  plenty  of  nitrogen  from  the 
air  and  have  liberated,  not  only  abundant  potassium  from  the 
inexhaustible  supply  contained  in  his  soil,  but  also  phosphorus, 
as  needed,  from  fine-ground  natural  rock  phosphate  plowed 
under  in  connection  with  the  decaying  organic  manures.  I have 
given  the  above  figures  in  order  to  show  something  of  the  enor- 


5 


mous  profit  from  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  commercial  fer- 
tilizers. as  well  as  to  show  that  it  is  not  necessary  for  the  farmer 
to  buy  small  amounts  of  three  different  elements  of  plant  food, 
but  rather  that  he  should  buy  large  amounts  of  one  element— so 
far  as  we  can  judge  from  these  broad  facts  concerning  the  sup- 
ply of  the  plant-food  elements  in  normal  soils  and  in  the  air,  the 
requirements  of  the  staple  farm  crops  for  these  elements,  and  the 
composition  and  cost  of  ‘'complete”  commercial  fertilizer  as 
well  as  of  ground  natural  rock  phosphate. 

If  now  we  turn  to  the  question  as  to  what  the  farmer  should 
do  from  the  standpoint  of  immediate  profit,  we  have  two  sources 
of  advice  and  information  for  our  guidance:  First,  the  fertil- 

izer manufacturers  and  dealers  and  Iheir  advertising  agents ; and. 
second,  the  experiments  conducted  by  agricultural  experiment 
stations  established  for  the  sole  purpose  of  discovering  the 
truth.  For  example,  the  Smith  Agricultural  Chemical  Com- 
pany of  Columbus,  Ohio,  publishes  a little  magazine  called 
Plant  Food , attractively  printed  on  excellent  paper,  which  con-  ' 
tains  some  interesting  anecdotes,  stories,  well-written  articles  on 
subjects  having  no  connection  with  business,  and  a limited 
amount  of  “educational”  advertising  for  “complete” .fertilizers. 
Thus  in  the  September  number  for  1912  we  find  the  following: 

“Soils  differ  in  the  plant-food  elements  required,  but  in  general 
group  themselves  as  follows : 

“CLAY  SOILS  rarely  contain  much  humus  even  in  the  natural  state. 
They  are  generally  supplied  with  Potash,  but  the  supply  of  Phosphoric 
Acid  is  fairly  well  limited,  and  varies  as  to  the  Ammonia  or  Nitrogen. 
Clay  soils  should  have  the  amount  of  plant  food  increased  by  the  addi- 
tion of  a complete  fertilizer  supplementing  farm  manure. 

“SANDY  SOILS  are  usually  deficient  in  all  three  plant-food  ele- 
ments. especially  Potash,  and  are  generally  acid. 

“MUCK  SOILS  as  a rule  do  not  need  Ammonia  or  Nitrogen,  but  Phos- 
phoric Acid  and  Potash  are  especially  needed. 

“LIMESTONE  SOIL  is  the  original  rich  soil,  but  its  stock  of  plant  food 
has  been  depleted  by  cropping  and  needs  a fertilizer  containing  Ammo- 
nia or  Nitrogen,  Phosphoric  Acid  and  Potash. 

“Observing  the  foregoing  general  statements  regarding  soils  the 
farmer  should  be  sold  a fertilizer  that  will  fit  the  particular  soil  he  will 
plant.” 

Of  course,  this  “educational”  mockery  is  to  the  effect  that  a 
“complete”  fertilizer  should  be  applied  to  all  soils  except  the 
muck  or  peat  soils,  which  at  most  constitute  only  a fraction  of 
one  percent  of  the  cultivated  land. 

On  page  11  of  Bulletin  No.  2 published  by  the  “Middle  West 
Soil  Improvement  Comjnittee”  of  Hie  National  Fertilizer  Associ- 
ation, occurs  the  following  tabular  statement: 


6 


“Paying  Results  from  the  Use  of  Fertilizers’’ 


Address 

Crop 

Amt. 

Fert. 

Results 

Yield 

Bu. 

Un- 

fert. 

Bu. 

Gain 

Bu. 

(1) 

Montgomery  Co.,  O 

Corn 

300 

90 

60 

To 

(2) 

Medina  Co.,  O 

Corn 

300 

80 

60 

20 

(3) 

Fayette  Co.,  O 

Corn 

300 

100 

70 

30 

(4) 

Camden  Co.,  O 

Corn 

250 

60 

40 

20 

(5) 

New. Vienna,  O 

Corn 

100 

78 

70 

8 

(6) 

New  Vienna,  O 

Corn 

200 

85 

70 

15 

(7) 

Van  Wert,  O 

Oats 

200 

73 

33 

40 

: 8) 

Van  Wert.  O 

Oats 

200 

70 

43 

27 

It  will  be  found  that  these  figures  show  an  average  gain 
of  20 % bushels  of  corn  per  acre  from  the  use  of  242  pounds  of 
fertilizer,  and  33%  bushels  of  oats  per  acre  from  the  use  of  200 
pounds  of  commercial  fertilizer.  They  constitute  the  only  data 
(?)  represented  in  the  bulletin,  and  no  information  is  given  as 
to  how  or  by  whom  these  data  (?)  were  secured,  but  the  loca- 
tions are  referred  to  in  a general  way  by  merely  naming  certain 
counties  or  towns  in  Ohio.  The  composition  of  the  fertilizer 
used  is  not  given,  but  the  following  statement  appears  in  the 
bulletin: 

“A  suitable  oat  fertilizer  is  one  carrying  about  2 percent  of  ammo- 
nia, 8 percent  phosphoric  acid  and  2 percent  potash.” 

Again,  on  the  title  page  of  Bulletin  No.  1 published  by  the 
‘'Middle  West  Soil  Improvement  Committee”  of  the  National 
Fertilizer  Association  occurs  the  following  statement: 

“Wheat  Grown  by  H.  A.  Waggoner,  Lindsay,  Ohio 

“Yield,  40  bushels  per  acre.  Complete  Fertilizer  used — 200  lbs.  per 
acre. 

“Average  Ohio  Yield — 16.2  bushels. 

“Mr.  Waggoner's  gain — 23.8  bushels  per  acre. 


“23.8  bushels  wheat  at  $1.00 $23.80 

“Cost  of  fertilizer 2.80” 


It  will  be  noted  that  Mr.  Waggoner’s  “gain”  of  “23.8  bushels 
per  acre”  is  found  by  subtracting  the  average  yield  of  wheat  for 
the  state  of  Ohio  from  the  yield  of  40  bushels  per  acre  repre- 
sented to  have  been  secured  by  Mr.  Waggoner  on  this  particular 
field  in  some  particular  year.  The  composition  of  the  fertilizer 
used  is  not  represented,  but  the  cost  is  shown  to  be  $28  per  ton. 

On  the  title  page  of  Bulletin  No.  3 of  the  “Middle  West  Soil 
Improvement  Committee”  of  the  National  Fertilizer  Association 
is  found  the  following  statement : 


“Wheat  On  a Darke  Co.,  Ohio,  Farm 

“Yield=-42  bushels  per  acre. 

“Average  yield  of  Ohio=16.2  bushels  per  acre. 

“Fertilzer  analyzed  2%  per  cent  ammonia : 8 per  cent  available  phos- 
phoric acid;  2*4  per  cent  potash. 

“Amount  used=300  lbs.  per  acre.” 

I quote  this  because  the  composition  of  the  fertilizer  used  is 
represented. 

Of  course,  the  sole  purpose  of  the  employes  of  the  National 
Fertilizer  Association  in  publishing  these  various  statements  is 
to  influence  farmers  and  landowners  to  use  such  ‘'complete'’ 
commercial  fertilizers  as  they  describe  and  advise,  and  the  enor- 
mous amounts  of  money  paid  by  the  farmers  for  such  materials 
certainly  indicate  that  such  advertising  accomplishes  the  pur- 
pose for  which  it  is  disseminated.  The  president  of  the  National 
Fertilizer  Association  made  the  following  statement  at  the  last 
annual  convention  of  that  association,  as  will  be  seen  from  the 
American  Fertilizer , issue  of  July  27,  1912,  page  29: 

“The  launching  of  the  Middle  West  Soil  Improvement  Committee  un- 
der the  auspices  of  the  National  Fertilizer  Association,  has  been  of  more 
good  within  the  time  than  any  movement  made  in  recent  years.  I have 
received  regularly  from  Dr*  Bell  a report  of  their  activities,  and  a few 
weeks  ago  it  was  my  pleasure  to  attend  one  of  their  business  meetings 
in  Chicago,  and  have  never  seen  a group  of  business  men  so  thoroughly 
engrossed  in  any  good1  work.  Mr.  Ailing,  the  untiring  chairman  and 
Prof.  Bell,  our  agronomist,  hardly  take  time  for  a meal  when  a business 
session  is  on/’ 

I have  followed  with  much  interest  and  with  great  care  the 
publications  and  articles  prepared  for  the  agricultural  press  and 
other  work  put  out  by  those  in  the  employ  of  the  “Middle  West 
Soil  Improvement  Committee,”  and  I should  certainly  agree  that 
they  are  working  for  the  “good”  of  their  employers. 

If  now  we  turn  to  the  results  of  definite  experiments  by  ag- 
ricultural experiment  stations,  we  have  a right  to  expect  to  learn 
the  truth,  at  least  concerning  the  temporary  effect  of  using  such 
fertilizers. 

The  Agricultural  Experiment  Station  of  Indiana  published 
in  April,  1912,  Bulletin  No.  155  entitled  “Results  of  Co-Opera- 
tion Fertilizer  Tests  on  Clay  and  Loam  Soils,”  by  J.  B.  Abbott 
and  S.  D.  Connor,  of  the  Department  of  Soils  and  Crops. 
The  authors  have  used  reasonable  prices  for  farm  products  and 
have  also  been  fair  to  the  fertilizer  industry  in  regard  to  the  cost 
of  fertilizers. 

They  report  15  different  tests  in  11  different  counties  witn 


Ttalics  mine,  C.  G.  H. 


8 


the  use  of  the  ordinary  “2-8-2”  fertilizer  for  corn,  and  they  show 
that,  as  a general  average,  for  every  dollar  invested  in  such  fer- 
tilizers the  value  of  the  increase  in  the  corn  crop  amounted  to 
$1.59. 

They  also  report  18  different  tests  in  16  different  counties 
with  the  use  of  “4-8-4”  fertilizer  on  corn,  and  show  that  for  every 
dollar  invested  in  “complete”  fertilizer  of  this  composition  the 
value  of  the  increase  in  the  corn  crop  was  worth  only  83  cents. 

Furthermore,  they  report  19  different  tests  in  13  different 
counties  with  the  use  of  “4-8-4”  fertilizer  on  wheat,  and  for  every 
dollar  invested  in  the  fertilizer  the  value  of  the  increase  produced 
amounted  to  $1.30. 

They  report  6 different  tests  in  4 different  counties  with  the 
use  of  “complete”  commercial  fertilizers  of  different  composi- 
tion on  oats,  and,  as  an  average,  every  dollar  invested  in  the  fer- 
tilizer produced  an  increase  in  the  oat  crop  valued  at  31  cents. 

Finally,  they  report  13  different  tests  in  7 different  counties 
with  the  use  of  “4-8-4”  fertilizer  on  potatoes,  and  for  every  dol- 
lar invested  in  the  fertilizer  the  increase  produced  in  the  potato 
crop  was  worth  $1.04. 

It  will  be  seen  that  as  a general  average  of  the  fertilizer  tests 
on  corn,  wheat,  and  oats,  the  investment  of  $1  in  “complete” 
commercial  fertilizer  paid  back  only  94  cents. 

In  the  summary  of  this  Bulletin  occurs  the  following  sig- 
nificant statement: 

“Phosphoric  acids  and  potash  gave  a greater  profit,  per  dollar  invested 
in  the  fertilizer,  than  complete  fertilizer,  on  both  corn  and  wheat." 

“In  nearly  all  experiments  with  all  crops  on  clay  and  loam  soils  phos- 
phoric acids  was  found  to  be  the  most  effective  of  the  fertilizer  elements.” 

Thus  the  data  reported  show  that  while  4-8-4  fertilizer  for 
corn  paid  back  only  83  cents  out  of  each  dollar  invested,  when 
the  nitrogen  was  omitted  from  the  fertilizer  it  then  paid  back 
$1.19  for  each  dollar  invested.  In  other  words,  by  omitting  the 
nitrogen  the  net  loss  of  17  cents  was  changed  to  a net  profit  of 
19  cents. 

Furthermore,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  results  mentioned 
above,  when  both  the  nitrogen  and  potassium  were  reduced  by 
one-half  (from  4-8-4  to  2-8-2) , the  net  return  per  dollar  invested 
was  changed  from  a loss  of  17  cents  to  a profit  of  59  cents;  and, 
in  harmony  with  the  above  quotation,  the  authors  of  this  bulle- 
tin show  that  when  the  nitrogen  was  entirely  omitted  from  the 
2-8-2  fertilizer  used  for  corn,  the  net  profit  per  dollar  invested 
rose  from  59  cents  to  $1.24. 


9 


This  series  of  experiments  did  not  include  any  tests  wi  th  the 
use  of  phosphorus  atone;,  but  Circular  No.  10  of  the  Indiana 
Station  gives  the  results  from  a comparative  test  with  acid  phos- 
phate and  raw  rock  phosphate  conducted  in  Scott  county  over 
a period  of  four  years  with  a two-year  rotation  of  corn  and 
wheat. 

If  we  allow  $15  per  ton  for  the  acid  phosphate  and  $7.50 
per  ton  for  the  ground  natural  phosphate,  and  figure  the  crops 
at  the  same  prices  as  were  used  by  the  Indiana  Station  (35  cents 
a bushel  for  corn  and  80  cents  for  wheat) , we  find  that  for  each 
dollar  invested  the  acid  phosphate  paid  back  $2.45  and  the  raw 
phosphate  $3.41.  as  net  profit. 

In  commenting  upon  these  experiments  in  Indiana  Circular 
No.  10,  Director  Goss  emphasizes  the  fact  that  the  acid  phosphate 
gave  better  results  for  the  first  two  years,  but  that  ‘"during  the 
third  and  fourth  season,  however,  the  rock  produced  very  strik- 
ing results,  even  forging  ahead  of  the  acid.” 

Attention  should  be  called  to  the  fact  that  where  land  is 
rented  on  shares,  from  one-third  to  one-half  of  the  crop  goes  to 
the  landlord;  and  this,  of  course,  would  include  his^share  of  the 
total  crop,  even  tho  the  tenant  made  some  use  of  “complete”  com- 
mercial fertilizer,  hoping  thereby  to  overcome  the  difficulty  of 
having  to  deal  with  an  improvident  landlord.  According  to 
Bulletin  No.  155  of  the  Indiana  Experiment  Station,  the  increase, 
as  an  average,  was  never  sufficient  to  justify  the  tenant  in  paying 
for  the  fertilizer  and  depending  upon  one-half  of  the  increase 
for  his  profit,  and  in  only  one  case  was  two-thirds  of  the  average 
increase  sufficient  to  pay  for  the  cost  of  the  “complete”  fertilizer. 

Director  Charles  E.  Thorne  of  the  Ohio  Experiment  Station 
has  reported  the  results  from  seven  years  of  investigation  where 
steamed  bone  meal  has  been  used  “side  by  side  withffour  brands 
of  factory-mixed,  ‘complete’  fertilizer.  These  brands  represent 
some  of  the  most  reputable  manufacturers  in  the  state  and  range 
from  4 percent  ammonia,  10  percent  phosphoric  acid,  and  4 per- 
cent polash,  to  1 percent  ammonia,  6 percent  phosphoric  acid, 
and  1 percent  potash.  The  fertilizers  are  all  applied  at  the  rate 
of  20o pounds  per  acre  to  corn  and  wheat  grown.in  rotation  and 
followed  by  one  year  in  clover.” 

As  a general  average,  the  “complete”  commercial  fertilizer 
increased  the  yield  of  corn  by  5%  bushels  per  acre,  while  the 
steamed  bone  meal  increased  the  yield  by  11  bushels. 

The  “complete”  fertilizer  increased  the  yield  of  wheat  by 


10 


9%  bushels  per  acre,  while  the  steamed  bone  meal  increased  the 
yield  by  14%  bushels. 

The  “complete”  fertilizer  increased  the  yield  of  hay  by  535 
pounds  per  acre,  as  an  average,  while  the  steamed  bone  meal 
increased  the  yield  by  1300  pounds. 

In  no  case  did  any  one  of  the  four  different  “complete”  fer- 
tilizers produce  as  large  an  average  increase  in  any  crop  as  was 
produced  by  the  steamed  bone  meal. 

The  steamed  bone  meal  contains  from  3 to  5 times  as  much 
phosphorus  as  the  “complete”  commercial  fertilizer  and  costs,  as 
a rule,  not  more  than  $28  per  ton,  which  is  the  same  as  was  paid 
for  the  “complete”  fertilizer  used  by  Mr.  Waggoner  in  accordance 
with  the  statement  quoted  above  from  Bulletin  No.  1 of  the  “Mid- 
dle West  Soil  Improvement  Committee”  of  the  National  Fertilizer 
Association. 

These  Ohio  investigations  show  that,  as  an  average,  the 
“complete”  fertilizer  was  used  with  at  least  temporary  profit.  It 
should  be  remembered  that  the  increase  in  the  yield  of  a crop 
from  the  use  of  a fertilizer  is  produced  standing  in  the  field  and 
not  delivered  at  the  market,  and  that  the  expense  of  getting  the 
crops  from  the  field  to  the  market  must  be  deducted  from  the 
market  price.  Even  unavoidable  loss  from  exposure  to  weather 
conditions,  destruction  by  animals,  etc.,  should  also  be  deducted. 
If  we  allow  35  cents  a bushel  for  corn,  70  cents  for  wheat,  and 
$8  a ton  for  hay,  we  are  probably  using  at  least  as  high  prices 
as  can  be  justified  for  these  crops  standing  in  the  field  in 
Livingston  county,  Illinois,  considering  a ten-year  average. 
Each  computation  on  this  basis  will  show  that  $5.60  invested  in 
“complete”  fertilizer  at  $28  per  ton  produced  (as  an  average  of 
Ihe  Ohio  investigations  mentioned  above)  a net  profit  of  $5.23, 
while  the  same  investment  in  steamed  bone  meal  produced  an 
average  net  profit  of  $13.60.  In  other  words,  the  net  profit  was 
2%  times  as  great  from  the  use  of  steamed  bone  meal  as  it  was 
where  the  same  amount  of  money  was  invested  in  “complete” 
fertilizer. 

These  results  show  that  if  a tenant  farmer  had  paid  for  the 
“complete”  fertilizer  and  retained  one-half  of  the  increase,  he 
would  have  scarcely  got  back  the  money  spent  for  “complete” 
fertilizer,  while  $5.60  spent  for  steamed  bone  meal  would  have 
paid  back  $9.60  in  his  half  of  the  increase.  (Steamed  bone  meal 
is  a good  phosphorus  fertilizer.  It  is  more  readily  available  but 
much  more  expensive  than  raw  rock  phosphate.)  . 


11 


Attention  should  also  be  called  to  the  fact  that  in  another 
experiment  conducted  by  the  Ohio  Agricultural  Experiment  Sta- 
tion, with  the  same  rotation  of  corn,  wheat,  and  clover,  the  aver- 
age of  all  crops  harvested  during  a period  of  fifteen  years  where 
manure  alone  was  used,  in  comparison  with  the  crops  grown 
where  manure  and  raw  rock  phosphate  were  both  used,  shows 
that  for  every  dollar  invested  the  raw  phosphate  was  used  with 
much  greater  profit  than  the  steamed  bone  meal  in  the  seven- 
year  experiment  noted  above.  These  experiments  also  included 
a comparative  test  with  the  use  of  acid  phosphate  applied  at 
about  twice  the  cost  of  the  raw  rock. 

If  we  accept  the  prices  used  by  the  Ohio  Station  for  these 
materials  and  for  the  value  of  the  crops  produced,  and  follow 
the  Ohio  method  of  computing  the  increase  produced  by  the 
phosphorus,  the  latest  report  from  Director  Thorne  (Ohio  Cir- 
cular No.  120)  shows  that  for  every  dollar  invested  the  acid  phos- 
phate paid  back  $5.10  and  the  ground  rock  phosphate  $6.20,  net 
profit. 

In  these  experiments  some  rational  economic  provision  was 
made  for  supplying  nitrogen  and  organic  matter  by  including 
clover  in  the  rotation  and  applying  farm  manure  to  be  plowed 
under  for  corn,  carrying  the  added  phosphates  in  intimate  con- 
tact with  the  decaying  organic  manures;  but  of  course  the  same 
kinds  and  amounts  of  manure  were  always  applied  without 
phosphate  to  other  similar  land  for  comparison  with  the  phos- 
phated  manure. 

The  results  given  above  represent  the  averages  of  tests  made 
with  two  different  kinds  of  manure  (exposed  barnyard  manure 
and  fresh  stable  manure)  ; but,  because  of  the  great  waste  of 
manure  from  exposure  in  the  barnyard,  we  are  of  course  most 
interested  in  the  results  secured  by  the  addition  of  phosphorus  to 
fresh  manure. 

The  same  methods  of  computation  (those  used  by  the  Ohio 
Station)  show  that  for  every  dollar  invested  the  acid  phosphate 
paid  back  $5.03,  while  the  raw  rock  phosphate  paid  back  $6.76, 
net  profit,  when  used  in  addition  to  fresh  manure,  these  results 
representing  the  net  value  of  the  increase  produced  by  the  phos- 
phorus over  and  above  that  produced  by  the  manure  alone. 

It  may  be  added  that  as  an  average  of  all  crops  harvested  dur- 
ing the  fifteen  years,  the  yields  per  acre  were  as  follows : 


Soil  treatment 

Corn, 

bu. 

Wheat, 

bu. 

Clover, 

tons 

None 

33.0 

11.2 

1.30 

Manure  alone 

54.6 

21.0 

1.80 

Manure  and  acid  phosphate 

62.4 

25.7 

2.28 

Manure  and  rock  phosphate  

62.0 

26.1 

2.25 

By  using  these  data  and  the  prices  commonly  used  by  the  Illi- 
nois Experiment  Station,  it  is  figured  that  each  dollar  invested 
in  raw  rock  phosphate  paid  back  §6.42  net  profit;  while  the 
acid  phosphate,  costing  twice  as  much  money  altho  containing 
only  one-half  as  much  phosphorus,  paid  back  only  §2.69  net 
profit  for  each  dollar  invested.  In  commenting  recently  upon 
these  Ohio  investigations  (Prairie  Farmer,  December  15,  1912,), 
Director  Thorne  makes  the  following  statements: 

“When  manure  is  reinforced  by  materials  carrying  phosphorus  to 
make  up  for  its  inevitable  deficiency  in  this  element,  and  is  then  applied 
directly  to  the  field  or  protected  from  the  losses  due  to  exposure  to  the 
weather  in  open  barnyards,  or  to  heating  in  piles,  either  in  stable,  yard 
or  field,  there  is  nothing  better  for  keeping  up  the  fertility  of  the  soil. 
The  assertion  is  made  that  on  most  farms  not  enough  manure  is  produced 
to  keep  up  the  fertility,  which  is  true.  In  this  case  the  manure  must  be 
reinforced  with  whatever  elements  are  not  supplied  in  sufficient  quantity. 
Phosphorus  in  the  form  of  raw  rock  phosphate  or  acid  phosphate  is  gen- 
erally the  essential  element.  In  our  experiments  40  pounds  of  rockphos- 
phate  costing  17  cents,  added  over  a dollar  to  the  crop- producing  value 
of  a ton  of  manure,  because  it  supplied  the  element  lacking  in  the  ma- 
nure.” 

For  more  complete  details  of  these  and  other  investigations 
where  raw  phosphate  has  been  used  in  comparison  with  other 
fertilizers,  the  reader  is  referred  to  Illinois  Experiment  Station 
Circulars  127  and  130  and  Soil  Report  No.  2,  which  will  be  sent 
free  of  charge  upon  request  to  the  Agricultural  Experiment  Sta- 
tion, Urbana,  Illinois. 

Since  the  publication  of  the  first  edition  of  this  circular  (No. 
165)  by  the  Illinois  Experiment  Station,  there  has  appeared  in 
the  agricultural  press  an  advertisement  a photographic  repro- 
duction of  which  is  shown  on  the  opposite  page.  This  advertis- 
ing statement  by  the  “Middle  West  Soil  Improvement  Committee" 
(of  the  National  Fertilizer  Association)  is  reproduced  here  in 
order  to  do  full  justice  to  the  subject,  with  respect  both  to  the 
farmers  and  to  the  advocates  of  “complete”  fertilizers. 


13 


Soil  Improvement  Talks 

No.  1. 

DR.  CHAS.  E.  THORNE, 
DIRECTOR  OF  THE  OHIO  EX- 
PERIMENT  STATION  has  made 
actual  farm  tests  for  18  years  on  a 
rotation  of  corn,  oats,  wheat  and 
hay  (circular  No.  120.)  He  found 
that  the  liberal  application  of  suit- 
able, complete  fertilizers,  at  an 
average  cost  for  fertilizer  of  $19.78 
per  acre  per  rotation,  gave  an  av- 
erage gross  return  of  $32.84  per 
acre  per  rotation,  or  an  average 
net  profit  of  $13.06  per  acre  per 
rotation.  This  is  an  average  profit 
of  over  66%  on  the  money  spent 
for  fertilizers. 

For  full  information  how  such 
results  are  being  obtained  by  others, 
mail  coupon  below  today. 

lWESTE  SOIL  IMPROVEMENT  9 16^9 l^Poftal  Tel.  Bldg. 

CHICAGO,  ILLINOIS 

rmmmmmCUT  OUT  AND  MAIL - - 

Send  me  without  Cost  or  obligation  your  Special  Crop  Bulletins. 


Name 


One  highly  commendable  feature  and  also  some  questionable 
points  in  this  advertisement  deserve  special  mention: 

(1)  The  figures  are  truthfully  reported  from  Circular  120 
of  the  Ohio  Agricultural  Experiment  Station,  and  they  represent 
the  actual  average  results  of  eighteen  years  of  careful  investi- 


14 


/ 


gation  with  ‘‘complete”  fertilizers  by  Director  Thorne,  at  Wooster, 
in  a five-year  rotation  of  corn,  oats,  wheat,  clover,  and  timothy, 
grown  on  five  different  series  of  plots,  so  that  every  crop  may 
be  represented  every  year.  As  a general  average,  the  “complete” 
fertilizers  have  cost  the  Ohio  Station  $19.78  per  acre  for  the  ro- 
tation, and  the  increase  in  crops  (at  the  prices  used  by  Director 
Thorne)  has  been  worth  $32.84,  thus  showing  a profit  of  $13.06. 
or  66  cents  for  each  dollar  invested.  Of  course  these  figures  are 
in  striking  contrast  with  those  reported  on  pages  6 and  7,  where, 
for  example,  a gain  is  indicated  of  $23.80  from  an  investment  of 
$2.80  by  Mr.  Waggoner. 

(2)  In  comparison  with  “complete”  fertilizers,  phosphorus 
was  used  alone  in  these  Ohio  experiments;  and  the  same  Ohio 
circular  (No.  120)  shows  that  $2.60  invested  in  phosphorus  gave 
a net  profit  of  $13.93  per  acre  per  rotation.  In  other  words,  as 
an  average  of  these  most  trustworthy  investigations  covering 
eighteen  years,  the  actual  profit  per  acre  from  $2.60  invested  in 
phosphorus  was  87  cents  greater  than  that  from  $19.78  invested 
in  the  “complete”  fertilizers.  The  fact  is  that  the  expenditure  for 
nitrogen  and  potassium  was  worse  than  useless;  for,  when  the 
net  returns  are  computed  as  above,  it  is  seen  that  the  actual  prof- 
its were  reduced  87  cents  per  acre  by  the  purchase  of  nitrogen 
and  potassium.  It  will  be  noted  that  for  every  dollar  invested  in 
phosphorus  alone  there  was  a net  profit  of  $5.36,  compared  with 
the  average  of  66  cents  from  “complete”  fertilizers.  Of  course 
the  profit  from  phosphorus  would  have  been,  still  greater  if  the 
increased  crops  produced  by  the  phosphorus  had  been  returned 
to  the  soil  to  a considerable  extent,  either  in  farm  manure  or  in 
green  manures  and  crop  residues,  as  they  would  be  in  rational 
systems  of  farming. 

If  one  invests  $2.60  in  phosphorus  and  receives  $16.53  there- 
from in  increased  crops,  then  it  would  seem  that  the  man  who 
has  any  more  money  to  invest  in  fertilizers  would  buy  more, 
phosphorus,. rather  than  spend  it  for  nitrogen  and  potassium, 
which  fail  to  pay  even  their  cost.  II  may  be  added  that  where 
nitrogen  was  .used  alone  in  these  same  Ohio  experiments,  it  paid 
back  only  58  percent  of  its  cost,  while  nitrogen  and  potassium 
together  paid  back  only  52  percent  of  their  cost.  Potassium 
alone  did  not  pay  its  cost,  but  when  used  in  addition  to  phos- 
phorus each  dollar  invested  in  potassium  paid  an  apparent  profit 
of  22  cents  in  five  years,  which  is  less  than  5 percent  per  annum. 

(3)  Another  very  important  point  to  consider  is  that  the  Ohio 


Experiment  Station  did  not  buy  the  “complete”  fertilizers  used  in 
these  experiments,  but  bought  the  ingredients  and  mixed  them  at 
about  two-thirds  the  average  cost  of  the  rbady-mixed  “complete” 
fertilizers.  If  we  figure  the  cost  of  the  ‘'complete”  fertilizers 
used  at  the  ordinary  price  (such,  for  example,  as  Mr.  Waggoner 
paid_See  paged),  then  the  average  profit  drops  at  once  from  66 
percent  to  11  percent,  or  to  about  2 percent  per  annum  on  the 
money  invested. 

(4)  Stilt  another  point  needs  careful  consideration  : Thisis 

the  price  of  farm  produce.  In  all  of  these  computations  by  the 
Ohio  Experiment  Station  the  prices  allowed  are  40  cents  a bushel 
for  corn,  30  cents  for  oats,  80  cents  for  wheat,  $8  a ton  for  hay, 
$2  for  straw,  and  $3  for  corn  stalks.  It  should  be  remembered 
that  these  prices  are  for  the  products  in  the  field,  and  that  they 
must  bring  enough  more  in  the  market  to  cover  unavoidable 
losses  and  the  cost  of  binding  twine,  shocking,  stacking,  thresh- 
ing. husking,  baling,  and  hauling  to  market.  The  judgment  of 
the  farmer  in  regard  to  such  losses,  expenses,  and  average  crop 
values  in  his  locality  is  usually  better  than  that  of  either  the  ex- 
perimenter or  the  fertilizer  agent. 

The  crop  values  used  by  the  Ohio  Station  are  about  30  per- 
cent higher  than  those  which  have  been  commonly  used  for  aver- 
age conditions  in  Illinois,  where  straw  and  corn  stalks  standing- 
in  the  field  may  have  no  market  value.  Such  a change  in  values 
would  reduce  the  average  profit  from  “complete”  fertilizers 
66  to  28  percent  for  the  five  years,  or  to  less  than  6 percent  per 
annum,  even  at  Ohio  prices  for  home-mixed  fertilizers.  (All  of 
the  fertilizers  used  in  these  experiments  are  applied  during  the 
first  eighteen  months  of  the  five-year  period.) 

These  very  valuable  Ohio  experiments  furnish  additional 
definite  proof  of  the  need  of  purchasing  phosphorus  in  profitable 
systems  of  permanent  soil  improvement;  but  the  results  do  not 
justify  advising  the  use  of  “complete”  fertilizers  in  general  farm- 
ing on  normal  corn-belt  soils;  and,  for  the  sake  of  maintaining 
general  industrial  prosperity,  as  Well  as  for  their  own  sake, 
farmers  and  landowners  should  be  encouraged  to  invest  their 
money  in  the  positive  and  permanent  improvement  of  their  soils, 
rather  than  to  spend  it  for  small  amounts  of  high-priced  “com- 
plete” fertilizers  in  systems  of  ultimate  land  ruin,  which  will 
finally  leave  them  too  poor  ever  to  adopt  systems  of  permanent 
agriculture. 

When  we  consider  the  widespread  practice  which  prevailed 


16 


among  farmers  only  a few  years  ago  of  planting  crops  and  per- 
forming many  other  farm  operations  in  accordance  with  the 
“signs  of  the  moon,”  a-nd  the  practice  of  “witching  for  water,” 
it  is  not  so  strange  that  in  the  older  states  they  should  use  the 
widely  advertised  “complete”  commercial  fertilizers  with  small 
temporary  profit  in  systems  of  ultimate  land  ruin,  instead  of 
basing  their  practices  upon  definite,  practical,  scientific  infor- 
mation which  is  already  easily  available  to  any  man  who  will 
study  the  existing  trustworthy  data  and  the  long  continued  in- 
vestigations conducted  by  such  public-service  institutions  as  the 
agricultural  experiment  stations.  Such  information  clearly 
shows  to  the  careful  reader  that  in  profitable  systems  of  general 
farming  nitrogen  should  be  secured  from  the  air.  potassium 
should  be  liberated  from  the  inexhaustable  supply  naturally  con- 
tained in  all  normal  corn-belt  soils,  and  that  phosphorus  should 
be  purchased  and  applied  liberally  in  low-priced  fine-ground 
natural  rock  phosphate,  ground  limestone  (likewise alow-priced 
natural  fertilizer)  also  being  used  where  needed. 

NOTES 

Natural  Rock  Phosphate 

Fine-ground  raw  rock  phosphate,  containing  from  10  to  14  percent  of 
phosphorus,  can  be  obtained  from  the  following  companies,  delivered  in 
bulk  on  board  cars  at  the  mines  in  Tennessee  for  $2.50  to  $5  per  ton,  the 
price  varying  with  the  quality.  The  freight  rate  from  Tennessee  per  ton 
of  2000  pounds  in  carload  lots  varies  from  $2.50  to  points  in  southern 
Illinois,  to  $3.58  to  northern  Illinois  points.  Of  course,  these  addresses 
are  given  solely  as  a matter  of  information,  and  the  Experiment  Station 
makes  no  recommendation  or  guarantees  as  to  reliability. 

Mt.  Pleasant  Fertilizer  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Robin  Jones,  Nashville,  Tenn. 

Natural  Phosphate  Co.,  Nashville,  Tenn. 

Farmers  Ground  Rock  Phosphate  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Ruhm  Phosphate  Mining  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Powdered  Rock  Phosphate  Co.,  Columbia,  Tenn. 

Farmers  Union  Phosphate  Co.,  Birmingham,  Ala. 

Southern  Lime  & Phosphate  Co.,  Birmingham,  Ala. 

Blue  Grass  Phosphate  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Federal  Chemical  Co.,  Columbia,  Tenn. 

Central  Phosphate  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Central  Kentucky  Phosphate  Co.,  Wallace,  Ky. 

American  Fertilizer  Co.,  Santa  Fe,  Texas. 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  rock  phosphate  varies  much  in 
quality.  Consequently,  it  should  always  be  purchased  upon  a guaranteed 
analysis,  and  it  is  advisable  for  the  purchaser  to  take  an  average  sample 
of  the  carload  when  received  and  have  it  analyzed  both  for  phosphorus 
and  for  fineness,  even  tho  the  analysis  cost  him  $2  or  $3.  To  collect 
an  average  sample  take  a small  teaspoonful  from  about  fifty  different 
places  in  the  car,  not  only  from  the  surface  but  also  from  different  depths. 
These  fifty  spoonfuls  well  mixed  together  will  make atrustworthy sample 
and  about  one  pound  of  this  should  be  sent  to  some  commercial  chemist 
for  analysis. 


17 


If  12 % -percent  rock,  containing  250  pounds  of  phosphorus  per  ton, 
costs  $7.50  including  freight),  then  10-percent  rock,  containing  200 
pounds  of  the  element  per  ton,  is  worth  $6,  a difference  in  value  of  $1.50 
per  ton,  which,  on  a 30-ton  car,  amounts  to  $45. 

The  important  phosphorus  compound  in  rock  phosphate  is  calcium 
phosphate,  Gas  P04)2.  The  percentage  of  this  compound  in  the  rock 
phosphate  marks  the  purity  of  the  rock.  Thus,  if  the  rock  phosphate 
contains  60  percent  of  calcium  phosphate,  it  is  60  percent  pure,  with  40 
percent  of  impurities. 

Sometimes  the  guarantee  is  given  as  “phosphoric  acid,"  meaning 
phosphoric  oxid,  P2  Os.  This  also  is  a definite  compound  and  always  con- 
tains 43%  percent  of  the  element  phosphorus.  Thus  it  will  be  seen  that 
the  same  sample  of  rock  phosphate  maybe  guaranteed  to  contain  62  per- 
cent of  calcium  phosphate,  Cas  (P04)2,  or  28.4  percent  of  “phosphoric 
acid"  {P2  Os),  or  12.4  percent  of  phosphorus  (P). 

Raw’  rock  phosphate  should  be  very  finely  ground,  so  that  at  least  90 
percent  of  the  material  can  be  washed  thru  a sieve  with  100  meshes  to 
the  liuear  inch,  or  with  10,000  meshes  to  the  square  inch.  Of  course, 
anyone  can  test  for  fineness  by  sifting  ten  ounces  and  then  drying  and 
weighing  what  will  not  wash  thru  the  sieve. 

As  a rule,  it  is  more  satisfactory  to  purchase  in  bulk  rather  than  in 
bags  (see  page  15  of  ^Circular  110) . 

Bone  Meal 

A good  grade  of  steamed  bone-meal  (about  12%  percent  phosphorus 
can  be  obtained  delivered  in  Illinois  for  about  $25  a ton,  from  the  local 
agents  of  Morris  & Go.,  Swift  & Go.,  Armour  & Co.,  the  American  Glue  Co., 
or  the  American  Fertilizer  Co.,  Chicago.  111.,  or  from  the  Empire  Carbon 
Works,  National  Stock  Yards,  East  St.  Louis,  111. 

Potassium  Salts 

Potassium  chlorid  (so-called  “muriate  of  potash"),  containing 
about  42  percent  of  potassium,  can  be  obtained  for  about  $45  a ton  from 
Armour  & Co.,  Swift  & Co.,  or  Darling  & Co.,  Union  Stock  Yards,  Chicago, 
111.,  from  the  German  Kali  Works  or  the  Nitrate  Agencies  Co.,  Chicago, 
111.,  from  A.  Smith  & Bro.,  Tampico,  111.,  or  from  the  American  Agricul- 
tural Chemical  Go.,  New  York,  N.  Y.,  and  kainit,  containing  about  10  per- 
cent of  potassium,  together  with  some  magnesium  sulfate,  magnesium 
chlorid,  and  sodium  chlorid,  can  also  be  obtained  from  Armour  & Co., 
Darling  & Co.,  Swift  & Co.,  Hirsch,  Stein  & Co.,  the  Chicago  Fertilizer 
Works,  or  the  German  Kali  Works,  Chicago,  111.,  for  about  $13  a ton. 

Ground  Limestone 

Ground  limestone  can  now  be  obtained  at  60  cents  a ton  ($1  in  bags, 
to  be  returned  at  purchaser’s  expense  and  risk’i  from  the  Southern 
Illinois  Penitentiary,  Menard,.  111.,  and  at  different  prices  from  the  follow- 
ing companies. 

Casper  Stolle  Quarry  & Contracting  Co.,  East  St.  Louis,  111.  (quarry 
at  Stolle,  111.) 

Southwestern  Contracting  & Engineering  Co.,  East  St.  Louis,  111. 

Ellis  Bros.,  Elsberry,  Mo. 

Carthage  Superior  Limestone  Co.,  Carthage,  Mo. 

Mitchell  Lime  Co.,  Mitchell,  Ind. 

John  Armstrong  Lime  & Quarry  Co.,  Alton,  111. 

Lehigh  Stone  Co.,  Kankakee,  111. 

Elmhurst-Chicago  Stone  Co.,  Elmhurst,  111. 

East  St.  Louis  Stone  Co.,  East  St.  Louis,  111. 

Columbia  Quarry  Co.,  St.  Louis,  Mo.  (quarry  at  Columbia,  111.) 

McLaughlin-Mateer  Co.,  Kankakee,  111. 

West  Side  Quarries  Co.,  Kankakee,  111. 


18 


Lockyer  Quarry  Co.,  Alton,  Mo. 

Western  Whiting  & Mfg.  Co.,  Elsah,  111. 

Eldred  Stone  Co.,  Eldred,  111. 

Marblehead  Lime  Co.,  Masonic  Temple,  Chicago,  111.  (quarries  at 
Quincy,  111.) 

United  States  Crushed  Stone  Co.,  184  LaSalle  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Dolese  & Shepard  Co.,  184  LaSalle  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Fruitgrowers  Refrigerating  & Power  Co.,  Anna,  111. 

Biggsville  Crushed  Stone  Co.,  Biggsville,  111. 

Hart  & Page,  Rockford,  111. 

McManus  & Tucker,  Keokuk,  Iowa. 

Moline  Stone  Co.,  Moline,  111. 

John  Markman,  Gladstone,  111. 

Superior  Stone  Co.,  218  Hearst  Bldg.,  Chicago,  111. 

Brownell  Improvement  Co.,' 1220  Chamber  of  Commerce,  Chicago,  111. 

Dolese  Bros.  Co.,  128  N.  LaSalle  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Ohio  & Indiana  Stone  Co.,  Indianapolis,  Ind.  (quarry  at  Greencastle, 
Ind.) 

0.  M.  Fulwider,  Bloomington,  Ind. 

Some  of  these  companies  furnish  fine-ground  limestone  and  some 
furnish  limestone  screenings,  which  include  both  vqry  fine  dust  and  some 
coarse  particles  even  as  large  as  corn  kernels.  In  carload  lots  the  price 
on  board  cars  at  the  plant  varies  from  50  cents  to  $1  a ton  according  to 
fineness.  The  freight  charges  are  one-half  cent  per  ton  per  mile,  with  a 
minimum  charge  of  25  cents  per  ton  by  each  railroad  handling  the  car, 
and  with  a minimum  carload  of  30  tons.  At  most  points  in  Illinois  the 
cost  delivered  in  bulk  in  box  cars  should  be  between  $1  and  $2  a ton. 
Sometimes  one  can  get  one  and  one-half  tons  of  material  containing  one 
ton  of  fine  dust  and  half  a ton  of  coarser  particles,  varying  in  size  from 
less  than  pinheads  to  corn  kernels,  at  no  greater  expense  than  would  be 
required  for  one  ton  of  fine-ground  stone  containing  no  coarser  particles. 
The  coarser  particles  will  last  in  the  soil  longer  than  the  finer  material, 
which  is  rapidly  lost  by  leaching;  and  a product  that  will  all  pass  thru  a 
sieve  with  8 or  10  meshes  to  the  linear  inch,  and  that  contains  all  of  the 
fine  dust  produced  in  the  process  of  crushing  or  grinding,  is  very  satis- 
factory. 

Portable  machines  for  crushing  and  grinding  limestone,  using  thresh- 
ing engines  for  power,  can  be  obtained  from — 

Williams  Patent  Crusher  & Pulverizer  Co.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Universal  Crusher  Co.,  Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa. 

Pennsylvania  Crusher  Co.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

Wheeling  Mold  & Foundry  Co.,  Wheeling,  W.  Ya. 

Jeffrey  Manufacturing  Co.,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

TO  ILLINOIS  BANKERS 

In  its  publication  entitled  ‘“Create  a Soil  as  Well  as  a Bank 
Reserve,'’ the  Illinois  Bankers’  Association  Committee  on  Agri- 
culture and  Vocational  Education  renders  the  following  verdict: 

“It  is  wisest  to  follow  the  teachings  of  the  University  of  Illinois 
College  of  Agriculture  in  the  purchase  and  use  of  fertilizers.  Advice 
given  by  so-called  “Soil  Improvement  Committees, M representing  private 
individuals  or  those  who  have  something  to  sell,  is  not  always  the  best." 


10 


Clover  on  Southern  Illinois  Soil:  Fairfield  Experiment  Field,  1910. 
Manure  Alone  on  Left;  Manure,  Limestone  and  Raw  Rock  Phosphate 
on  Right.-  . Clover  Seeded  Alike  on  Both  Sides.) 


Wheat  on  Illinois  Corn-Belt  Prairie  Soil  at  Urbana.  As  an  average 
of  four  Years,  Rock  Phosphate  has  Increased  the  Yield  by  10  ]■> 
Bushels  per  Acre. 


RESOLUTION 


(Adopted  by  the  Illinois  State  Farmers’  Institute  at  its  Annual 
Meeting,  February,  1913.) 

'‘Resolved,  That  we  endorse  the  Illinois  system  of  permanent  agricul- 
ture and  recommend  its  adoption  throughout  the  state.  We  disapprove 
the  action  of  the  Middle  West  Soil  Improvement  Committee  of  the  Na- 
tional Fertilizer  Association,  posing  as  an  educational  institution,  and  by 
so  doing  trying  to  enlist  the  aid  of  farm  papers,  country  newspapers,  and 
bankers  in  distributing  its  misleading  information,  in  an  effort  to  create 
a sentiment  in  favor  of  mixed  commercial  fertilizers  in  Illinois.  The 
State  Farmers’  Institute  hereby  advises  editors,  farmers,  bankers  and 
others  against  accepting  the  teachings  of,  or  assisting  in  any  way,  this  or 
any  other  organization  whose  teachings  are  contrary  to  the  facts  estab- 
lished by  our  State  Experiment  Station." 


From  Ohio  Experiment  Station  Bulletin  183 


THE  PRODUCE  OF  ONE  TON  OF 

MANURE  i v,  ’4 


From  one  ton  of  barnyard  From  one  ton  of  fresh  From  one  ton  of  stable  manure 

manure  stable  manure  reinforced  with  raw  phosphate 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA  ILLINOIS,  MAY,  1913 


CIRCULAR  NO.  166 


A METHOD  FOR  THE  IMPROVEMENT  OF  BUTTERMILK 
FROM  PASTEURIZED  CREAM 

By  LeRoy  Lang 

Assistant  in  Dairy  Manufactures 

At  the  present  time  there  is  a general  demand  for  pasteurized 
dairy  products,  showing  that  the  public  appreciates  clean,  safe 
food.  The  pasteurization  of  cream  for  butter-making  is  becom- 
ing more  general,  and  while  this  process  enables  the  buttermaker 
to  produce  uniform  butter,  it  has  a subsequent  detrimental  effect 
upon  the  buttermilk. 

The  buttermilk  from  pasteurized  cream  is  thin  and  watery, 
usually  lacking  in  flavor,  and  wheys  off  very  readily;  it  may  also 
lack  the  desired  buttermilk  acidity  which  the  trade  demands. 
Because  of  these  defects,  many  creameries  are  losing  the  oppor- 
tunity to  supply  the  current  demand  for  good  buttermilk.  Some 
creamery  operators  insist  that  the  loss  due  to  the  decreased  de- 
mand for  buttermilk  from  pasteurized  cream  is  equal  to  two  cents 
per  pound  on  the  butter.  The  economical  disposal  of  the  by- 
product of  the  creamery  is  more  important  than  the  development 
of  creamery  side  lines. 


The  method  described  in  this  circular  for  improving  butter- 
milk from  pasteurized  cream  has  been  tried  at  the  University  of 
Illinois  Creamery  and  has  proved  to  be  very  successful.  It  con- 
sists in  adding  to  the  pasteurized  buttermilk  about  10  percent  of  a 
starter  prepared  from  a culture  sold  under  the  commercial  name 
of  Bacillus  Bulgaricus.  When  properly  made,  this  preparation 
both  furnishes  a pleasant  acid  and  changes  the  thin  pasteurized 
buttermilk  into  a heavy-bodied  product  with  all  the  pleasing 
characteristics  of  raw  buttermilk. 

In  ordering  the  commercial  culture  of  Bacillus  Bulgaricus,  ‘ 
the  purpose  for  which  it  is  to  be  used  should  be  specified  and  the 
culture  which  makes  the  milk  viscous  should  be  requested. 

Since  this  product  is  made  from  nine  parts  of  buttermilk 
and  one  part  of  skim  milk,  it  should  not  be  sold  under  the  name 
“buttermilk”  unless  the  other  ingredients  are  also  named  on  the 
label.1  It  differs  from  the  ordinary  commercial  buttermilk, 
which  is  made  by  ripening  two  equal  amounts  of  skim  milk,  one 
with  a commercial  butter  culture  and  the  other  with  a com- 
mercial culture  of  Bacillus  Bulgaricus,  and  churning  the  two 
lots  together. 

This  preparation  of  pasteurized  buttermilk  will  be  of  interest 
to  many  creameries  where  the  manufacture  of  the  ordinary  com- 
mercial buttermilk  is  impossible. 

Apparatus 

The  Bacillus  Bulgaricus  culture  developes  best  at  a tempera- 
ture between  95°  and  100°  F.  This  is  20°  to  30°  above  the  best 
temperature  for  the  growth  of  the  cream-ripening  cultures.  It 
has  been  found  convenient  to  hold  the  quart  bottles  or  eight- 
gallon  cans  in  which  the  cultures  are  being  developed  in  a wash 
sink  30  x 20  x 16  inches  deep.  By  means  of  water  and  steam  con- 
nections, the  sink  is  kept  full  of  water  at  a temperature  between 
95°  and  100°  F.,  thus  serving  the  purpose  of  an  incubator.  The 
quart  bottles  are  supported  by  a rack  so  that  they  are  immersed 
within  three  inches  of  the  top. 

With  this  arrangement  it  is  necessary  to  warm  the  water  by 
the  admission  of  steam  about  every  six  hours  in  order  that  the 
temperature  may  be  maintained  between  95°  and  100°  F.  Besides 
the  bottle  rack,  this  sink  holds  an  eight-gallon  can  for  the  bulk 
culture. 


1 Ruling  of  Board  of  Food  and  Drug  Inspection,  Bureau  of  Chemistry,  U.  S.  Dept  of  Agr. 


3 


Wash  Sink  Equipped  for  Growing  Bacillus  Bulgaricus  Culture 


i 


4 


The  sink  and  bottle  rack  are  also  used  for  pasteurizing  milk 
in  bottles  for  culture  propagation. 

Preparing  Skim  Milk  for  the  Culture 

Care  must  be  exercised  in  the  selection  of  skim  milk  for  the 
propagation  of  the  first  mother  culture.  If  the  skim  milk  is 
fresh  and  clean  and  pasteurized  twice  at  a temperature  of  185°  F. 
for  thirty  minutes,  and  an  interval  of  six  to  ten  hours  is  allowed 
between  pasteurizations,  during  which  the  milk  is  held  at  90°  F., 
a good  milk  for  the  culture  is  insured.  With  ordinary  creamery 
milk,  which  often  has  an  acidity  approaching  .2  percent,  or  is 
not  clean,  it  is  advisable  to  pasteurize  the  milk  three  times  at  in- 
tervals of  six  hours  before  inoculating  the  first  culture. 

The  pasteurization  may  be  made  either  in  quart  bottles  or  in 
the  starter  can.  If  in  bottles,  they  should  be  thoroly  scalded  with 
boiling  water  before  the  milk  from  the  starter  can  is  placed  in 
them.  (Quart  bottles  should  be  filled  only  three-fourths  full.) 
The  time  of  pasteurization  should  be  counted  from  the  time  the 
milk  reaches  a temperature  of  185°  F.  When  pasteurizing  milk 
in  quart  bottles  set  in  a vat  of  water,  from  twenty-five  to  thirty 
minutes  are  required  to  heat  the  milk  to  185°  F.  after  the  water 
surrounding  the  bottles  attains  a temperature  of  190°  F.  When 
using  cans  set  in  water  at  190°  F.,  from  fifteen  to  twenty  minutes 
are  required  to  bring  the  milk  temperature  to  185°  F. 

Creamery  skim  milk,  thoroly  pasteurized  and  containing 
less  than  .2  percent  acidity,  furnishes  milk  of  a satisfactory 
quality  for  all  propagations  except  the  first  one.  However,  if 
there  is  any  doubt  as  to  the  thoroness  of  the  pasteurization,  the 
milk  should  be  re-pasteurized;  or,  if  the  pasteurized  milk  is  to  be 
held  six  to  ten  hours  before  it  is  inoculated,  the  periodic  pas- 
teurizations always  insure  better  results.  Since  the  spore  forms 
vegetate  in  a few  hours,  very  poor  milk  may  result  from  one 
pasteurization,  and  when  creamery  pasteurized  milk  is  held 
several  hours  in  the  starter  can  and  not  cooled,  a sweet  curd  is 
a common  result.  This  is  caused  by  organisms  which  are  in  a 
dormant  condition  when  heated  but  which  vegetate  and  multiply 
rapidly  after  the  pasteurization  is  finished  and  the  temperature 
has  not  been  sufficiently  reduced  to  check  their  growth. 


5 


If  the  milk  for  the  mother  culture  or  bulk  culture  cannot  be 
inoculated  at  once,  it  should  be  cooled  and  then  warmed  to  a 
temperature  between  95°  and  100°  F.  just  before  the  inoculation 
is  made.  The  temperature  for  the  best  growth  of  Bulgaricus  is 
also  favorable  for  gas  organisms  and  the  dormant  forms  before 
mentioned,  but  if  the  Bulgaricus  is  given  opportunity,  it  will 
predominate  and  produce  a fine,  heavy-bodied  culture. 


Preparation  of  Mother  Cultures 

As  a matter  of  convenience  it  is  desirable  to  develop  cultures 
in  quart  bottles,  especial  care  being  taken  to  keep  them  pure  and 
active;  these  are  called  “mother  cultures.”  In  order  to  obtain 
sufficient  material  for  adding  to  the  buttermilk,  similar  cultures 
are  developed  in  cans  and  referred  to  as  “bulk”  cultures. 

After  the  milk  in  the  bottles  is  cooled  to  100°  F.,  it  is  inocu- 
lated with  the  commercial  culture  of  Bacillus  Bulgaricus,  which 
may  be  obtained  from  any  dairy  bacteriological  laboratory. 
After  the  addition  of  this  culture,  the  temperature  is  maintained 
between  95°  and  100°  F.  for  twenty-four  hours. 

If  the  first  propagation  of  B.  Bulgaricus  is  made  carefully, 
the  desirable  characteristics  will  be  more  evident  in  the  first  cul- 
ture of  the  mother  starter  than  they  will  be  in  a first  transfer  of 
the  ordinary  butter  culture. 

The  Bulgaricus  Bacillus  grows  rapidly  and  produces  acid 
much  faster  and  in  larger  quantities  than  does  the  common  lactic 
acid  germ.  Several  of  the  Bulgaricus  propagations  produce  2% 
percent  acid  in  forty-eight  hours.  Of  150  mother  cultures  grown 
from  four  primary  cultures,  an  average  acidity  of  1.49  percent 
was  produced  in  twenty-four  hours.  This  production  of  acid  is 
so  rapid  that  the  first  culture  acquires  1 percent  or  more  of  acid 
in  twenty-four  hours,  and  the  curd  formed  is  viscous  and  ropy. 

The  second  propagation  is  made  on  the  day  following  the 
first  inoculation.  Milk  from  the  starter  can  that  has  been  pas- 
teurized to  185°  F.  for  thirty  minutes  may  be  used,  but  if 
pasteurized  twice,  better  results  are  assured.  The  quart  bottle  is 
thoroly  scalded  and  the  milk  placed  in  it  as  on  the  previous  day. 
A milk-testing  pipette  of  17.6-cc.  capacity,  dipped  in  boiling 


0 


water  before  being  used,  serves  as  a very  convenient  instrument 
for  inoculating  the  second  bottle  from  the  first.  The  first  mother 
culture  is  shaken  with  a rotary  motion,  and  the  pipette  of  cul- 
ture is  removed  and  placed  in  the  bottle  of  pasteurized  milk,  thus 
inoculating  the  second  culture  with  17  to  18  cc.  from  the  first 
culture  grown.  This  second  culture  is  also  shaken  with  a rotary 
motion  and  then  placed  in  the  bottle  rack.  This  rack  may  be 
kept  permanently  in  the  sink  of  water,  or  improvised  incubator, 
at  a temperature  between  95°  and  100°  F.  The  next  day  the  sec- 
ond propagation  is  inoculated  into  the  third  mother  culture  just 
as  on  the  previous  day  the  first  propagation  was  inoculated  into 
the  second  culture.  The  remainder  of  the  second  mother  culture 
is  then  ready  for  use  in  ten  to  twenty  gallons  of  milk,  for  the 
production  of  a bulk  culture  of  Bulgaricus. 

Preparation  of  Bulk  Culture 

In  making  the  bulk  culture,  use  a pint  or  a pint  and  one-half 
of  mother  culture  for  every  ten  gallons  of  pasteurized  milk. 
Mix  the  culture  thoroly  thruout  the  milk  and  hold  at  a tempera- 
ture between  95°  and  100°  F.  for  eighteen  to  twenty-four  hours, 
or  until  it  has  an  acidity  varying  from  1.2  to  1.5  percent.  The 
body  of  the  culture  should  be  viscous  and  heavy.  The  average 
acidity  produced  in  the  bulk  cultures  which  were  used  at  the 
University  Creamery  for  buttermilk  improvement  was  1.58  per- 
cent in  twenty-four  hours. 

The  characteristic  of  the  Bulgaricus  culture  is  the  heavy, 
viscous  consistency  of  the  curd  which  is  formed.  The  viscosity 
of  the  culture  which  is  necessary  for  buttermilk  improvement  is 
obtained  when  the  proportion  of  acid  approximates  1 percent. 
The  viscosity  is  not  increased  by  holding  a culture  and  producing 
acid  above  1.5  percent.  Furthermore,  if  the  acid  exceeds  this 
amount,  a sharp  acid  flavor  is  likely  to  result.  However,  there 
may  be  trade  conditions  making  it  advisable  to  use  a high  acid 
bulk  culture. 

The  cultures  do  not  always  develop  alike.  The  rapid  grow- 
ing ones  are  most  desirable,  and  are  fully  developed  in  eighteen 
hours.  If  the  bulk  culture  is  not  to  be  used  at  once,*it  should  be 
cooled  to  50°  F.,  or  lower,  to  check  further  acid  development. 


7 


If  possible,  it  should  be  placed  in  the  refrigerator;  in  this  way  it 
may  be  kept  for  three  days  without  injury,  altho  the  acid  gradu- 
ally increases. 

The  bulk  culture  may  be  propagated  in  ordinary  five-  or  ten- 
gallon  milk  cans.  However,  after  the  culture  is  developed  it 
should  not  be  held  for  any  length  of  time  in  metal  containers 
but  should  be  placed  in  earthen  or  enamel  ware  in  order  to  avoid 
a metallic  flavor  caused  by  the  action  of  the  acid  upon  the  metal. 

Mixing  Bulgaricus  with  Pasteurized  Buttermilk 

The  amount  of  bulk  culture  which  should  be  mixed  with  the 
pasteurized  buttermilk  depends  upon  the  acidity  and  the  body  of 
the  buttermilk  the  trade  demands,  and  the  quality  of  the  pas- 
teurized buttermilk  which  is  to  be  improved.  Ordinarily,  by 
mixing  from  ten  to  fifteen  gallons  of  bulk  culture  with  one  hun- 
dred gallons  of  pasteurized  buttermilk  a very  satisfactory  product 
is  obtained.  When  the  culture  is  poured  into  the  buttermilk,  it 
should  be  mixed  thoroly  by  stirring;  it  is  not  at  all  necessary  to 
churn  the  mixture,  in  fact,  churning  will  reduce  the  viscosity. 
The  acidity  of  this  treated  buttermilk  will  range  from  .65  to  .85 
percent. 

At  the  University  Creamery,  the  buttermilk  as  sold  is  a mix- 
ture of  one  gallon  of  culture  to  nine  gallons  of  pasteurized  but- 
termilk. The  bulk  culture  is  added  to  buttermilk  fresh  from  the 
churn.  The  acidity  of  this  buttermilk  when  prepared  varies  from 
.7  to  .8  percent,  and  it  does  not  whey  off  appreciably  in  forty- 
eight  hours. 

Cultures  Made  from  Skim-Milk  Powder 

Where  it  is  impossible  to  get  good  clean  skim  milk,  it  may 
be  necessary  to  use  skim-milk  powder.  In  making  the  mjlii,  imo 
three-fourths  of  a pound  of  skim-milk  powder  to  a gallon  of 
pure  water.  Proceed  with  this  milk  the  same  ae  with  ordinary 
skim  milk,  pasteurizing  it  at  a temperature  between  185°  and 
190°  F.  for  thirty  minutes.  The  cultures  made  from  skim-milk 
powder  have  a distinct  caramelized  flavor;  however,  after  the 
bulk  culture  is  added  to  the  buttermilk,  this  flavor  is  scarcely 
noticeable  and  not  objectionable. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  MAY,  1913 


CIRCULAR  NO.  167 


THE  ILLINOIS  SYSTEM  OF  PERMANENT  FERTILITY1 

By  Cyril  G.  Hopkins 
Chief  in  Agronomy  and  Chemistry 

I have  been  invited  to  speak  upon  the  Illinois  system  of 
permanent  fertility  ; but  I wish  to  state  in  the  beginning  thaL  in 
complying  with  this  request,  I am  speaking  in  a representative 
capacity.  Many  have  contributed  to  the  development  of  this 
system,  including  both  able  investigators  in  other  states  and 
countries,  my  own  colleagues  in  the  investigation  of  Illinois 
soils,  and  the  truly  scientific  farmers  of  this  state,  some  of  whom 
have  kept  their  own  farm  practice  so  close  up  to  the  work  of  the 
Experiment  Station  as  to  exert  great  influence  upon  the  adoption 
of  systems  of  permanent  fertility. 

It  is  more  than  fifty  years  since  Liebig  wrote  the  following 
words  : 

“Agriculture  is,  of  all  industrial  pursuits,  the  richest  in  facts, 
and  the  poorest  in  their  comprehension.  Facts  are  like  grains  of  sand 
which  are  moved  by  the  wind,  but  principles  are  these  same  grains 
cemented  into  rocks.” 

An  important  part  of  the  work  performed  in  Illinois  has  con- 
sisted in  assembling  the  facts  the  world  affords  and  cementing 
these  into  concrete  forms  which  serve  as  a firm  foundation  upon 
which  to  build  systems  of  permanent  agriculture. 


1 Address  before  the  Illinois  State  Fanners  Institute  at  Sterling,  February  19,  1913, 


9 


The  main  problem  of  permanent  fertility  is  simple.  It  con- 
sists, in  a word,  in  making  sure  that  every  essential  element  of 
plant  food  is  continuously  provided  to  meet  the  needs  of  maximum 
crops ; and  of  course  any  elements  which  are  not  so  provided  by 
nature  must  be  provided  by  man.  The  whole  subject  has  been 
greatly  and  unnecessarily  complicated,  not  only  by  erroneous 
theories  commonly  held  by  farmers  and  sometimes  advocated  by 
falsely  so-called  scientists  holding  official  positions,  such  as  the 
theory  that  crop  rotation  will  maintain  the  fertility  of  the  soil, 
but  also  by  the  ruinous  policy  of  most  commercial  fertilizer 
interests  in  urging  and  often  persuading  farmers  to  use  small 
amounts  of  high-priced  so-called  “complete”  fertilizers  which 
add  to  the  soil  only  a fraction  of  the  plant  food  actually  required 
by  the  crops  removed,  with  the  inevitable  result  that  the  land  it- 
self is  steadily  impoverished. 

The  more  rational  system  makes  use  of  abundant  quantities 
of  all  essentials  but  at  a cost  low  enough  to  be  within  reasonable 
reach.  Those  materials  which  are  naturally  contained  in  the  soil 
in  inexhaustible  amounts  are  liberated  from  the  soil  and  Ihus 
made  available  for  crop  production;  those  contained  in  the  air 
are  likewise  drawn  upon  as  needed ; while  those  materials  which 
must  be  purchased  are  bought  and  applied  in  liberal  quantities, 
but  in  low-priced  forms,  and  then  made  available  on  the  farm  by 
economic  natural  methods. 

Four  Fundamental  Facts 

Nearly  150  years  ago  Senebier  of  Switzerland  found  that  the 
carbon  of  plants  is  derived  from  the  carbon  dioxid  of  the  air, 
and  it  is  more  than  a century  since  DeSaussure  of  France  first 
gave  to  the  world  a correct  and  almost  complete  statement  con- 
cerning the  essential  mineral  food  of  plants.  Later,  Lawes  and 
Gilbert  of  England  established  the  fact  that  for  most  plants  the 
soil  must  furnish  the  nitrogen  as  well  as  the  mineral  elements; 
and  more  than  a quarter-century  has  passed  since  Hellriegel  of 
Germany  discovered  that  bacteria  living  in  symbiotic  relation- 
ship with  legume  plants  have  power  to  gather  nitrogen  from  the 
inexhaustible  atmospheric  supply. 

These  are  the  four  great  fundamental  facts  upon  which  the 
science  of  plant  growth  and  permanent  fertility  must  be  based, 
and  they  were  all  discovered  before  the  Illinois  Experiment 
Station  was  established. 


3 


Illinois  Contributions 

There  remained,  however,  two  very  important  general’ 
problems,  and  in  the  solution  of  these  Illinois  has  made  some 
contributions.  One  of  these  relates  to  the  amount  of  nitrogen 
taken  from  the  air  by  legumes  under  normal  field  conditions; 
and  the  other  concerns  the  liberation  of  mineral  plant  food  from 
insoluble  materials. 

It  is  not  enough  to  know  that  clover  has  power  to  secure  ni- 
trogen from  the  air;  we  should  know  how  much  nitrogen  is  thus 
secured  in  order  that  we  may  plan  intelligently  to  provide  nitro- 
gen for  the  production  of  corn,  oats,  wheat,  and  other  non- 
legumes^  instead  of  using  clover  merely  as  a soil  stimulant  in 
systems  of  ultimate  land  ruin,  as  is  still  the  most  common  prac- 
tice. 

It  is  also  a matter  of  the  greatest  economic  importance  that 
definite  information  should  be  secured  in  regard  to  the  practical 
means  of  utilizing  mineral  plant  food  from  the  abundant  natural 
supplies  nearest  at  hand,  such  as  Tennessee  phosphate  rock,  Illi- 
nois limestone,  and  the  potassium  minerals  already  present  in 
our  normal  soils. 

Plant-Food  Elements 

In  brief,  there  are  ten  elementary  substances  which  bear  the 
same  relation  to  the  making  of  crops  as  brick  and  mortar  bear 
to  a wall  of  masonry.  If  any  one  of  Ihese  ten  elements  is  entirely 
lacking,  it  is  impossible  to  produce  a grain  of  corn  or  wheat,  a 
spear  of  grass,  or  a leaf  of  clover. 

Two  elements,  carbon  and  oxygen,  are  taken  into  the  plant 
from  the  air  thru  the  leaves;  hydrogen  is  secured  from  water 
absorbed  by  the  roots;  and  iron  and  sulfur  are  also  supplied  by 
nature  in  abundance.  But  the  other  five  elements  require  careful 
consideration  if  lands  are  to  be  kept  fertile.  These  are  potassium, 
magnesium,  calcium,  phosphorus,  and  nitrogen  ; and  every  land- 
owner  ought  to  be  as  well  acquainted  with  these  five  elements  as 
he  is  with  his  five  nearest  neighbors. 

Instead  of  making  this  acquaintance  and  gaining  a knowl- 
edge of  important  facts  and  principles,  the  average  farmer  in  the 
older  states,  with  failing  fertility,  has  made  the  acquaintance  of 
the  fertilizer  agent;  and  instead  of  purchasing  what  he  needs  for 
the  permanent  improvement  of  his  soil,  he  buys  what  the  agent 


4 


wants  to  sell,  with  the  common  result  that  the  seller  is  enriched 
while  the  soil  is  merely  stimulated  to  greater  poverty. 

Potassium. — A careful  study  of  the  facts  shows  that  potas- 
sium is  one  of  the  abundant  elements  in  nature;  that  the  average 
crust  of  the  earth  contains  2J/2  percent  of  this  element;  and  that 
normal  soils  bear  some  relation  in  composition  to  the  average  of 
the  earth’s  crust. 

If  normal  soil  had  the  same  percentage,  then  the  plowed  soil 
of  an  acre  6%  inches  deep  (corresponding  to  2 million  pounds 
of  soil)  would  contain  50,000  pounds  of  potassium.  In  Illinois, 
the  normal  soils  actually  do  contain  from  25,000  to  45,000  pounds 
per  acre  of  this  plant-food  element  in  the  first  G % inches,  while 
less  than  4 pounds  of  potassium  would  be  added  in  an  applica- 
tion of  200  pounds  of  the  most  common  commercial  fertilizer. 
The  Illinois  system  of  permanent  fertility  does  not  provide  for 
the  purchase  of  potassium  for  normal  soils,  but  it  does  provide 
for  the  liberation  of  an  abundance  of  that  element  from  the  prac- 
tically inexhaustible  supply  in  the  soil.  This  liberation  is  ac- 
complished by  the  action  of  decaying  organic  matter  plowed  un- 
der in  the  form  of  farm  manure  or  crop  residues,  including  clover 
or  other  legumes. 

Only  where  the  soil  is  positively  deficient  in  potassium  sus- 
ceptible of  liberation,  as  is  the  case  with  some  sand  soils  and 
with  most  peaty  swamp  lands,  need  potassium  be  purchased  in 
permanent  systems  of  either  grain  farming  or  live-stock  farming ; 
but  in  market' gardening,  or  in  raising  timothy  hay  for  the  mar- 
ket, commercial  potassium  may  be  required;  and,  on  some  worn 
soils  especially  deficient  in  decaying  organic  matter,  temporary 
use  of  kainit  is  often  advisable. 

Magnesium  and  Calcium. — As  a general  average,  the  normal 


Bloomington  Experiment  Field,  1902:  Corn,  Bushels 


soils  of  Illinois  contain  more  than  four  times  as  much  potassium 
as  magnesium,  while  the  loss  by  leaching  and  cropping  in  ration- 
al systems  of  grain  or  live-stock  farming  may  be  actually  greater 
for  magnesium  than  for  potassium,  so  that  magnesium  is  more 
likely  to  become  deficient  in  soils  than  is  potassium. 

The  calcium  supply  in  normal  soils  is  also  only  one-fourth 
that  of  potassium,  while  the  average  loss  by  cropping  and  leach- 
ing is  four  times  as  great,  so  that  16  to  1 expresses  the  relative 
importance  of  calcium  and  potassium  in  the  problem  of  perma- 
nent fertility  on  normal  Illinois  soils. 

All  limestones  contain  calcium;  and  the  common  dolomitic 
limestone  in  the  almost  measureless  deposits  of  northern  Illinois 
contains  both  calcium  and  magnesium  in  very  suitable  form  both 
for  plant  food  and  for  correcting  or  preventing  soil  acidity. 

In  the  Illinois  system  of  permanent  fertility,  ground  natural 
limestone  is  applied,  where  needed,  at  the  rate  of  about  two 
tons  per  acre  every  four  years.  With  the  same  price  and 
purity,  probably  the  dolomite  is  preferable  to  the  high  calcium 
stone  of  southern  Illinois,  altho  both  kinds  have  been  used  with 
very  good  results.  Further  data  from  investigations  now  in 
progress  are  expected  to  furnish  definite  information  as  to  the 
relative  value  of  these  materials. 

Phosphorus. — Attention  was  called  to  the  fact  that  2 million 
pounds  of  the  average  crust  of  the  earth  contains  50,000  pounds 
of  potassium;  but  compared  with  this  we  find  only  2,000  pounds 
of  phosphorus.  Likewise,  the  plowed  soil  of  an  acre  of  average 


60.3  59.5  73.0  56.4  77.6  58.9  74.8  80.9 

Bloomington  Experiment  Field,  1903:  Corn,  Bushels 


6 


Illinois  land  contains  about  35,000  pounds  of  potassium  but  less 
than  1,200  pounds  of  phosphorus.  When  grain  is  sold  from  the 
farm,  about  equal  amounts  of  phosphorus  and  potassium  are 
carried  away,  while  in  independent  systems  of  live-stock  farm- 
ing much  more  phosphorus  than  potassium  leaves  the  farm. 

At  3 cents  a pound  for  phosphorus  one  can  double  the  amount 
of  that  element  contained  in  the  plowed  soil  of  our  $200-land  at 
a cost  of  $35  an  acre,  while  to  double  the  potassium  in  the  same 
stratum  would  cost  more  than  $1000  an  acre. 

Phosphorus  can  be  purchased,  delivered  at  the  farmer’s  rail- 
road station  in  Illinois,  for  about  3 cents  a pound  in  the  form  of 
fine* ground  natural  rock  phosphate,  for  10  to  12  cents  a pound 
in  steamed  bone  meal,  or  for  12  to  15  cents  in  acid  phosphate. 
It  can  be  used  with  profit  in  any  of  these  forms,  but  the  data  thus 
far  secured  in  comparative  experiments  plainly  indicate  that, 
with  equal  amounts  of  money  invested,  the  natural  rock  phosphate 
will  give  the  greatest  profit  in  rational  permanent  systems.  At 
least  1,000  pounds  per  acre  every  four  years  should  be  applied, 
and  for  the  first  application  even  three  or  four  tons  per  acre  is 
not  considered  too  much  phosphate  by  those  who  best  under- 
stand the  need  and  value  of  phosphorus  on  normal  Illinois  land. 

Nitrogen  and  Organic  Matter. — There  is  a rather  common 
opinion  that  the  growing  of  clover  enriches  the  soil  in  nitrogen, 
and  many  even  believe  that  clover  in  crop  rotation  will  maintain 


60.8  69.8  72.7  62.5  85.3  66.4  70.3  90.5 


Bloomington  Experiment  Field,  1904:  Oats,  Bushels 


7 


the  fertility  of  the  ^oil.  These  same  people  are  likely  to  think 
that  the  application  of  limestone  and  phosphate  involves  much 
expense  and  work,  and  that  the  returns  are  much  less  certain 
than  those  from  other  labor  and  money  investments. 

Such  opinions  are  largely  erroneous.  The  mere  growing  of 
clover  on  normal  land  does  not  enrich  it.  Even  the  nitrogen  is 
not  increased  unless  the  clover  crop  is  returned  to  the  soil  either 
directly  or  in  farm  manure.  Rotation  with  such  crops  as  corn, 
oats,  and  clover  depletes  the  soil  of  all  important  elements  of  fer- 
tility, and  on  normal  soils  always  results  ultimately  in  land  ruin, 
unless  some  system  of  restoration  is  practiced.  Glover  takes 
large  amounts  of  calcium  and  phosphorus  from  the  soil,  and 
does  not  increase  the  nitrogen  content  if  only  the  roots  and 
stubble  are  left  because  they  contain  no  more  nitrogen  than  the 
clover  itself  will  take  from  soils  of  normal  productive  power. 

To  increase  or  maintain  the  nitrogen  and  organic  matter  of 
the  soil  is  the  greatest  practical  problem  in  American  agriculture. 
In  an  hour’s  time  one  can  spread  enough  limestone  or  phosphate 
on  an  acre  of  land  to  provide  for  large  crops  of  wheat,  corn,  oats, 
and  clover  for  ten  or  twenty  years,  while  to  supply  the  nitrogen 
for  the  same  length  of  time  would  require  from  20  to  40  tons  of 
clover,  or  from  80  to  160  tons  of  farm  manure,  to  be  added  to  the 
same  acre  of  land,  even  tho  one  of  the  four  crops  harvested 
secured  its  nitrogen  from  the  air. 

Certainly  we  are  making  no  such  additions  to  the  soil  in 
average  Illinois  agriculture,  and  one  may  well  ask,  How  then  is 
it  possible  to  grow  the  crops  now  produced  in  this  state?  In  the 
simplest  language  the  answer  to  this  question  is:  By  “skinning” 
the  soil, — by  working  the  land  for  all  that’s  in  it, — by  following 
the  example  of  our  ancestors,  who  brought  agricultural  ruin  to 


28.8  30.5  39.2  33.2  50.9  29.5  37.8  51.9 

Bloomington  Experiment  Field,  1905:  Wheat,  Bushels 


8 


millions  of  acres  of  once  fertile  farm  land  in  the  original 
thirteen  states. 

To  provide  nitrogen  in  the  Illinois  system  of  permanent  agri- 
culture requires  the  use  of  common  sense  and  positive  knowledge, 
the  same  as  in  providing  limestone  and  phosphorus. 

For  the  live-stock  farmer  I would  suggest  a five-field  system, — 
a four-year  rotation  of  corn,  corn,  oats,  and  clover  grown  upon 
four  fields  for  five  years,  while  the  fifth  field  is  kept  in  alfalfa.  At 
the  end  of  the  fifth  year  the  alfalfa  field  is  brought  into  the  ro- 
tation and  one  of  the  four  fields  seeded  to  alfalfa  for  another  five- 
year  period,  and  so  on. 

If  the  crop  yields  are  50  bushels  each  of  corn  and  oats,  2 Ions 
of  clover,  and  3 tons  of  alfalfa  ;■  if  the  straw  and  half  the  corn 
stalks  are  used  for  bedding  and  all  other  produce  for  feed,  and 
if  60  percent  of  the  nitrogen  in  the  manure  is  used  for  the  pro- 
duction of  crops,  then  a system  is  provided  which  will  perma- 
nently maintain  the  supply  of  nitrogen. 

For  the  farmer  who  sells  grain  and  hay,  a 25-bushel  wheat 
crop  may  well  be  substituted  for  the  first  corn  crop,  clover  being 
seeded  on  the  wheat  for  plowing  under  the  next  year  before 
planting  corn.  If  the  fall  and  spring  growths  oif  this  clover 
aggregate  1%  tons,  and  if  only  the  grain  and  clover  seed  and  the 
alfalfa  hay  are  sold,  all  clover,  stalks,  and  straw  being  returned 
to  the  land,  this  also  provides  a system  for  the  permanent  mainte- 
nance of  nitrogen. 

If  the  crop  yields  are  all  increased  by  50  percent,  or  even  by  100 
percent,  these  systems  still  provide  for  the  nitrogen  supply,  un- 
less with  the  larger  yields  on  richer  land  a somewhat  greater 
amount  is  likely  to  be  lost  by  leaching  than  is  added  in  the  rain 


.58  .46  1.65  .51  .00  .81  2.36  .00 


Bloomington  Experiment  Field,  1906:  Clover,  Tons 
“(N)”  means  nitrogen  applied  for  previous  crops.  Where  the 
wheat  “lodged”  in  1905,  the  clover  was  smothered.) 


9 


and  by  the  azotobacter  and  other  non-symbiotic  bacteria. 

While  these  systems  are  distinctly  for  live-stock  farming  or 
for  grain  and  hay  farming,  they  should  be  considered  as  only 
suggesting  the  basis  for  solving  the  nitrogen  problem.  In 
diversified  farming  a combination  of  these  systems  will  often  be 
preferred  to  either  one  alone.  The  important  point  is  that  the 
landowner  should  know  the  essential  facts  and  base  his  practice 
upon  them  in  order  to  provide  for  permanent  fertility  with  respect 
to  both  nitrogen,  phosphorus,  and  limestone. 

Application  op  Principles  Established 

From  the  definite  information  already  secured  in  the  investi- 
gation of  Illinois  soils,  including  the  general  soil  survey  of  the 
entire  state  and  the  detailed  survey  of  more  than  forty  counties, 
it  is  safe  to  say  that  at  least  two-thirds,  and  probably  three-fourths, 
of  all  the  cultivated  soils  of  Illinois  are  already  in  need  of 
phosphorus  and  organic  manures,  and  most  of  this  vast  area  is 
also  deficient  in  limestone. 

The  facts  thus  far  presented  are  derived  chiefly  from  the  in- 
vestigations relating  to  the  formation  of  soils,  the  requirements 
of  crops,  and  the  composition  and  possible  supply  of  natural  fer- 
tilizing materials,  such  as  limestone,  phosphates,  and  organic 


63.1  64.3  82.1  64.1  78.9  64.3  81.4  88.4 

Bloomington  Experiment  Field.  1907 : Corn,  Bushels 


10 


manures,  including  animal  excrements,  legume  crops,  and  crop 
residues.  I wish  now  to  cite  some  typical  illustrations  giving 
the  proofs  or  results  from  the  actual  application  of  these  prin- 
ciples in  the  production  of  field  crops  in  the  most  rational  and 
trustworthy  field  investigations  in  the  world’s  record  of  agricul- 
tural science. 

tiothamsted  Experiments. — At  Rothamsted,  England,  a four- 
year  rotation  of  turnips,  barley,  clover,  and  wheat  has  been  prac- 
ticed for  sixty-four  years.  To  reduce  the  results  to  the  simplest 
terms,  I have  computed  the  value  of  the  four  crops  at  conservative 
prices1  for  Illinois  farm  conditions. 

On  the  unfertilized  land,  the  value  per  acre  of  the  four  crops 
amounted  to  $74.84  for  the  years  1848  to  1851,  and  to  $28.50  for 
1908  to  1911,  sixty  years  later.  Bear  in  mind  that  these]  data 
represent  no  mere  opinion  or  theory : they  represent  the  facts 
from  the  first  and  last  four-year  periods  in  sixty-four  years  of 
farming  on  normal  soil  where  the  crops  were  rotated,  where 
clover  was  grown  (with  beans  substituted  whenever  clover 
failed)  ; and  where  half  of  the  turnips  were  fed  on  the  land,  thus 
supplying  a limited  amount  of  farm  manure.  This  soil  was  also 
abundantly  supplied  with  limestone. 

On  another  part  of  the  same  field,  the  treatment  of  which 
differed  from  the  unfertilized  part  only  by  the  addition  of 
mineral  plant  food,  the  crop  values  were  $74.57  for  the  years 
1848  to  1851,  and  $77.57  for  1908  to  1911. 

These  are  indeed  remarkable  facts,  but  they  are  supported  by 
twenty-year  averages,  the  average  values  of  the  four  crops  hav- 
ing been  $70.06  for  the  first  twenty  years  and  $76.83  for  the  third 

1 $1.40  a ton  for  turnips,  50  cents  a bushelfor  barley,  $6  a ton  for  hay,  and  70  cents  a bushel 
for  wheat. 


35.3  36.9  47.5  36.2  45.8  31.0  57.2  58.1 

Bloomington  Experiment  Field,  1908:  Corn,  Bushels 


11 


twenty-year  period,  where  mineral  plant  food  was  applied. 
Barley,  which  is  grown  three  years  after  clover,  is  the  only  one 
of  the  four  crops  to  show  actual  decrease  in  yield,  and  the  in- 
crease in  clover  and  of  the  crops  which  follow  soon  after  the 
clover  is  still  more  than  sufficient  to  counterbalance  the  decrease 
in  barley.  Of  course,  this  system  is  perfect  and  permanent,  so 
far  as  clover  is  concerned,  because  the  clover  bacteria  have 
power  to  secure  nitrogen  from  the  air;  while  in  the  case  of  wheat 
and  turnips,  sufficient  nitrogen  to  maintain  the  yields  has  been 
provided  thus  far  by  some  growth  of  clover  not  harvested  for 
hay,  the  leguminous  weeds  which  grow  in  both  barley  .and 
wheat,  the  manure  from  the  turnips,  and  the  depletion  of  the 
soil’s  supply. 

Where  additional  supplies  of  nitrogen  were  provided  together 
with  the  mineral  plant  food,  the  crop  values  per  acre  were  $77.21 
for  the  years  1848  to  1851,  and  $93.79  for  1908  to  1911.  Thus 
the  crop  values  from  the  best  fertilized  land  have  been  more  than 
three  times  as  great  as  those  from  the  unfertilized  land  during 
the  last  rotation  of  this  sixty-four-year  period. 

Louisiana  Experiments. — The  longest  record  of  a rational 
permanent  system  o.f  agriculture  conducted  in  America  is  fur- 
nished by  the  Louisiana  Experiment  Station.  As  an  average  of 
nineteen  years,  the  values  per  acre  of  three  crops  were  $29.79  from 
unfertilized  land,  and  $92.04  where  organic  manures  and  phos- 
phorus were  regularly  applied1  in  a three-year  rotation  of  (1) 
cotton,  (2)  corn  and  cowpeas,  (3)  oats  and  cowpeas.  Here  the 

1 In  addition,  5 pounds  per  acre  of  potassium  were  applied  every  three  years. 


0 R P K RP  RK  PK  RPK 

53.6  49.4  63.8  45.3  72.5  51.1  59.5  64.2 

Bloomington  Experiment  Field,  1909:  Oats,  Bushels 


12 


crop  values  from  the  well-fertilized  land  average  more  than  three 
times  as  great  as  those  from  the  unfertilized  land  under  the  same 
rotation  and  with  two  legume  cover  crops  grown  every  three 
years. 

Ohio  Experiments. — The  Ohio  Experiment  Station  has  re- 
ported sixteen  years’  results  from  a three-year  rotation  of  corn, 
wheat,  and  clover,  both  from  unfertilized  land  and  from  land 
treated  with  farm  manure  and  phosphorus.  As  a general  aver- 
age, the  values  per  acre  of  the  three  crops  at  Illinois  prices  were 
$27.07  on  untreated1  land,  $44.65  where  farm  manure  was  ap- 
plied, $53.82  where  manure  and  rock  phosphate  were  used,  and 
$53.61  where  manure  and  acid  phosphate  were  applied,  practi- 
cally the  same  yields  having  been  secured  whelher  the  phos- 
phorus was  applied  in  raw  rock  phosphate  or  in  acid  phosphate, 
costing  twice  as  much.  The  well-fertilized  land  has  produced 
nearly  twice  as  much  as  the  land  where  no  manure  and  phos- 
phate were  used,  altho  clover  was  grown  every  third  year  in  the 
rotation  and  all  of  the  land  was  limed. 

On  the  basis  of  these  figures,  8 tons  of  manure  were  worth 
$17.58,  or  $2.20  per  ton;  and  the  rock  phosphate,  costing  about 
$7.50  or  $8  per  ton,  was  worth  $57.31 ; or,  if  we  use  the  Ohio 
methods  of  computing  the  amount  and  value  of  the  increase  pro- 
duced, each  ton  of  raw  phosphate  was  worth  $65.63 : and  it  may 

1 Except  for  lime  and  clover. 


1.09  (.83)  4.21  1.26  (1.671  (.33)  3.27  (.42) 

Bloomington  Experiment  Field,  1910:  Glover,  Tons  of 
Hay  or  (Bushels  of  Seed). 


13 


well  be  added  that  to  obtain  the  same  amount  of  phosphorus  in 
the  common  high-priced  mixed  manufactured  commercial  ferti- 
lizer, such  as  farmers  are  advised  by  the  fertilizer  manufacturers 
and  advertising  agencies  to  use,  would  cost  about  $75. 

Illinois  Experiments.-*— hi  the  last  annual  meeting  of  the  Illi- 
nois Farmers’  Institute  at  Gentralia,  I presented  the  averages  from 
many  of  the  Illinois  soil  experiments,  especially  the  results  from 
our  southern  Illinois  experiment  fields,  where  limestone  is  the 
material  of  first  importance  in  the  beginning  of  systems  of  per- 
manent soil  improvement;  and  I also  reported  the  average  results 
from  the  oldest  experiments  in  the  state  where  raw  rock  phos- 
phate has  been  used.1  These  results  show,  for  example,  that  as 
an  average  of  318  tests  conducted  in  southern  Illinois  during  a 
period  of  eight  years,  two  tons  of  ground  limestone,  applied  once 
in  four  years  at  a cost  of  about  $2.50  per  acre,  has  produced  an 
increase  of  5 bushels  of  corn,  (3%  bushels  of  oats,  4 bushels  of 
wheat,  and  % ton  of  hay.  They  also  show  that  where  one  ton 
per  acre  of  fine-ground  rock  phosphate  was  applied  on  the  com- 
mon corn-belt  land  on  the  University  farm  at  Urbana  in  a rota- 
tion of  wheat,  corn,  oats,  and  clover,  the  value  of  the  increase 
produced  paid  back  more  than  100  percent  for  the  first  crop 
rotation  and  nearly  200  percent  for  the  second  four-year  period, 
and  in  addition  to  this  the  soil  has  grown  25  percent  richer  in 
phosphorus,  while  the  untreated  land  has  grown  poorer 

Two. years  ago  I gave  a summarized  report  of  all  the  Illinois 
soil  investigations  that  have  been  conducted  since  this  organiza- 
tion secured  from  the  Illinois  legislature  the  first  appropriation 
to  the  state  experiment  station  for  this  work.  Thus  the  general 
plans  and  progress  of  the  Illinois  soil  investigations,  and  many 


1 See  Circular  157. 


O R P K RP  RK  PK  RPK 

22.5  25.6  57.6  21.7  60.2  27.3  54.0  60.4 

Bloomington  Experiment  Field,  1911:  Wheat,  Bushels 


14 


of  the  details,  are  already  contained  in  your  annual  reports,  and 
more  complete  data  are  easily  available  in  the  bulletins  and  soil 
reports  from  the  Illinois  Experiment  Station.  (See  also  Circu- 
lars 110,  127,  and  165.) 

In  closing  this  paper  I shall  direct  your  special  attention 
only  to  the  detailed  data  and  illustrations  from  one  of  our  oldest 
experiment  fields  on  the  typical  prairie  soil'  of  the  corn  belt, 
where  phosphorus  is  usually  the  element  of  first  importance  in 
the  beginning  of  soil  improvement,  especially  where  clover  and 
manure  have  been  used  in  the  past  in  a way  to  maintain  in  the 
soil  a fair  supply  of  decaying  organic  matter.  It  should  be 
stated,  however,  that  on  some  farms  on  the  same  type  of  soil, 
where  corn  has  been  grown  almost  continuously  for  many  years, 
with  perhaps  an  occasional  crop  of  oats  and  with  little  or  no  use 
of  clover  or  manure  (not  even  by  pasturing) , the  active  organic 
matter  may  already  be  so  reduced  as  to  be  the  first  factor  which 
limits  the  crop  yields.  Under  such  conditions  clover  is  the  only 
crop  which  phosphorus  is  likely  to  benefit. 

This  soil  experiment  field  was  established  near  Bloomington, 
McLean  county,  in  the  fall  of  1901,  soon  after  the  first  state  ap- 
propriation for  soil  investigations  became  available;  and  the  re- 
sults presented  are  from  eielit  contiguous  and  very  uniform  plots 
of  ground.  A five-year  rotation  is  practiced,  including  two  crops 
of  corn  and  one  each  of  oats,  clover,  and  wheat.  All  these  plots 
received  one  small  uniform  application  of  lime  at  the  beginning 
of  the  experiment,  so  that  the  treatment  of  the  plots  has  differed 


0 R P K RP  RK  PK  RPK 

47.9  62.5  74.5  57.8  86.1  58.9  79.2  83.4 


Bloomington  Experiment  Field,  1912:  Gorn,  Bushels 


15 


only  as  indicated  in  the  diagrams,  with  the  exception  that  during 
the  first  four  years,  commercial  nilrogen(uN”)  was  applied  lo  the 
four  plots  which  have  subsequently  received  nitrogen  additions 
only  in  crop  residues,  as  indicated  by  “R”  in  the  diagrams. 
Phosphorus  is  indicated  by  “P,”  and  its  total  cost  in  steamed 
bone  meal  is  indicated  by  that  part  of  the  last  diagram  (see 
page  20)  which  stands  above  the  four  short  cross  marks.  Potas- 
sium is  represented  by  “K,”  and  its  cost  was  the  same  as  the  cost 
of  phosphorus. 

In  computing  the  values,  corn  is  figured  at  35  cents  per 
bushel,  oats  at  30  cents,  wheat  at  70  cents,  hay  at  $6  per  ton,  and 
clover  seed  at  $6  per  bushel.  These  are  very  conservative  prices, 
but  they  are  probably  as  high  as  it  is  safe  to  use  for  the  value  of 
increase  from  soil  treatment,  because  of  the  additional  expense  for 
harvesting,  shocking,  stacking,  threshing,  husking,  and  market- 
ing. Computation  will  show  that  during  the  last  four  years  the 
value  of  the  produce  from  the  land  receiving  phosphorus  has 
been  twice  as  much  as  that  from  Ihe  untreated  land.  In  other 
words,  $2.50  invested  in  phosphorus  has  brought  the  same  gross 
income  as  $250  invested  in  land;  and  even  the  interest  on  the 
land  investment  is  five  times  the  annual  cost  of  the  phosphorus. 
Furthermore,  the  addition  of  phosphorus  tends  toward  enrich- 
ment and  consequently  toward  the  protection  of  the  capital  in- 
vested in  the  land.  Another  very  important  point  is  that  up  to 
the  time  of  harvest,  practically  no  extra  work  is  required  to  pro- 
duce the  increase  from  phosphorus. 

The  effect  of  the  crop  residues  (“R”)  in  1911  and  1912  indi- 
cates that  the  value  of  clover  plowed  under  may  ultimately 
reappear  in  subsequent  grain  crops. 

Finally,  the  fact  should  be  emphasized  that  ordinary  farm- 
ing is  not  a very  profitable  business  financially,  but  that  intelli- 
gent permanent  soil  improvement  is  both  the  safest  and  the  most 
profitable  investment  that  farmers  can  make. 


10 


NOTES 


Natural  Rock  Phosphate 


Fine-ground  raw  rock  phosphate,  containing  from  10  to  14  percent  of 
phosphorus,  can  be  obtained  from  the  following  companies,  delivered  in 
bulk  on  board  cars  at  the  mines  in  Tennessee  for  $2.50  to  $5  per  ton,  the 
price  varying  with  the  quality.  The  freight  rate  from  Tennessee  per  ton 
of  2000  pounds  in  carload  lots  varies  from  $2.50  to  points  in  southern 
Illinois,  to  $3.58  to  northern  Illinois  points.  Of  course,  these  addresses 
are  given  solely  as  a matter  of  information,  and  the  Experiment  Station 
makes  no  recommendations  or  guarantees  as  to  reliability. 

Mt.  Pleasant  Fertilizer  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Robin  Jones,  Nashville,  Tenn. 

Natural  Phosphate  Co.,  Nashville,  Tenn. 

Farmers  Ground  Rock  Phosphate  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Ruhm  Phosphate  Mining  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Powdered  Rock  Phosphate  Co.,  Columbia,  Tenn. 

Farmers  Union  Phosphate  Co.,  Birmingham,  Ala. 

Southern  Lime  & Phosphate  Co.,  Birmingham,  Ala. 

Blue  Grass  Phosphate  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Federal  Chemical  Co.,  Columbia,  Tenn. 

Central  Phosphate  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Central  Kentucky  Phosphate  Co.,  Wallace,  Ky. 

American  Fertilizer  Co.,  Santa  Fe,  Texas. 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  rock  phosphate  varies  much  in 
quality.  Consequently,  it  should  always  be  purchased  upon  a guaranteed 
analysis,  and  it  is  advisable  for  the  purchaser  to  take  an  average  sample 
of  the  carload  when  received  and  have  it  analyzed  both  for  phosphorus 
and  for  fineness,  even  tho  the  analysis  cost  him  $2  or  $3.  To  collect 
an  average  sample  take  a small  teaspoonful  from  about  fifty  different 
places  in  the  car,  not  only  from  the  surface  but  also  from  different  depths. 
These  fifty  spoonfuls  well  mixed  together  will  make atrustworthy sample 
and  about  one  pound  of  this  should  be  sent  to  some  commercial  chemist 
for  analysis. 

If  12% -percent  rock,  containing  250  pounds  of  phosphorus  per  ton, 
costs  $7.50  (including  freight),  then  10-percent  rock,  containing  200 
pounds  of  the  element  per  ton,  is  worth  $6,  a difference  in  value  of  $1.50 
per  ton,  which,  on  a 30-ton  car,  amounts  to  $45. 

The  important  phosphorus  compound  in  rock  phosphate  is  calcium 
phosphate,  Ca3  (P04)2.  The  percentage  of  this  compound  in  the  rock 
phosphate  marks  the  purity  of  the  rock.  Thus,  if  the  rock  phosphate 
contains  60  percent  of  calcium  phosphate,  it  is  60  percent  pure,  with  40 
percent  of  impurities. 

Sometimes  the  guarantee  is  given  as  “phosphoric  acid,”  meaning 
phosphoric  oxid,  P2  O5.  This  also  is  a definite  compound  and  always  con- 
tains 43%  percent  of  the  element  phosphorus.  Thus  it  will  be  seen  that 
the  same  sample  of  roek  phosphate  may  be  guaranteed  to  contain  62  per- 
cent of  calcium  phosphate,  Cas  (P04)2,  or  28.4  percent  of  “phosphoric 
acid”  (P2O5),  or  12.4  percent  of  phosphorus  (P). 

Raw  rock  phosphate  should  be  very  finely  ground,  so  that  at  least  90 
percent  of  the  material  can  be  washed  thru  a sieve  with  100  meshes  to 
the  linear  inch,  or  with  10,000  meshes  to  the  square  inch.  Of  course, 
anyone  can  test  for  fineness  by  sifting  ten  ounces  and  then  drying  and 
weighing  what  will  not  wash  thru  the  sieve. 

As  a rule,  it  is  more  satisfactory  to  purchase  in  bulk  rather  than  in 
bags  (see  page  15  of  Circular  110). 


17 


Bone  Meal 

A good  grade  of  steamed  bone  meal  (about  12 Vo  percent  phosphorus)  . 
can  be  obtained  delivered  in  Illinois  for  about  $25  a ton,  from  the  local 
agents  of  Morris  & Co.,  Swift  & Co.,  Armour  & Co.,  the  American  Glue  Co., 
or  the  American  Fertilizer  Co.,  Chicago,  111.,  or  from  the  Empire  Carbon 
Works,  National  Stock  Yards,  East  St.  Louis,  111. 

Potassium  Salts 

Potassium  chlorid  (so-called  “muriate  of  potash”),  containing 
about  42  percent  of  potassium,  can  be  obtained  for  about  $45  a ton  from 
Armour  & Co.,  Swift  & Co.,  or  Darling  & Co.,  Union  Stock  Yards,  Chicago, 
111.,  from  the  German  Kali  Works  or  the  Nitrate  Agencies  Co.,  Chicago, 
111.,  from  A.  Smith  & Bro.,  Tampico,  111.,  or  from  the  American  Agricul- 
tural Chemical  Co.,  New  York,  N.  Y.,  and  kainit,  containing  about  10  per- 
cent of  potassium,  together  with  some  magnesium  sulfate,  magnesium 
chlorid,  and  sodium  chlorid,  can  also  be  obtained  from  Armour,  & Co., 
Darling  & Co.,  Swift  & Co.,  Hirsch,  Stein  & Co.,  the  Chicago  Fertilizer 
Works,  or  the  German  Kali  Works,  Chicago,  111.,  for  about  $13  a ton. 

Ground  Limestone 

Ground  limestone  can  now  be  obtained  at  60  cents  a ton  ($1  in  bags, 
to  be  returned  at  purchaser’s  expense  and  risk)  from  the  Southern 
Illinois  Penitentiary,  Menard,  111.,  and  at  different  prices  from  the  follow- 
ing companies. 

Casper  Stolle  Quarry  & Contracting  Co.,  East  St.  Louis,  111.  (quarry 
at  Stolle,  111.) 

Southwestern  Contracting  & Engineering  Go.,  East  St.  Louis,  111. 

Ellis  Bros.,  Elsberry,  Mo. 

Carthage  Superior  Limestone  Co.,  Carthage,  Mo. 

Mitchell  Lime  Co.,  Mitchell,  Ind. 

John  Armstrong  Lime  & Quarry  Co.,  Alton,  111. 

Lehigh  Stone  Co.,  Kankakee,  111. 

Elmhurst-Chicago  Stone  Co.,  Elmhurst,  111. 

East  St.  Louis  Stone  Co.,  East  St.  Louis,  111. 

Columbia  Quarry  Co.,  St.  Louis,  Mo',  (quarry  at  Columbia,  111.} 

McLaughlin-Mateer  Co.,  Kankakee,  111. 

Lockyer  Quarry  Co.,  Alton,  Mo. 

Western  Whiting  & Mfg.  Co.,  Elsah,  111. 

Eldred  Stone  Co.,  Eldred,  111. 

Marblehead  Lime  Co.,  Masonic  Temple,  Chicago,  111.  (quarries  at 
Quincy,  111.) 

United  States  Crushed  Stone  Co.,  184  LaSalle  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Dolese  & Shepard  Co.,  184  LaSalle  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Fruitgrowers  Refrigerating  & Power  Co.,  Anna,  111. 

Biggsville  Crushed  Stone  Co.,  Biggsville,  111. 

Hart  & Page,  Rockford,  111. 

McManus  & Tucker,  Keokuk,  Iowa. 

Moline  Stone  Co  , Moline,  111. 

John  Markman,  Gladstone,  111. 

Superior  Stone  Co.,  218  Hearst  Bldg.,  Chicago,  111. 

Brownell  Improvement  Co.,  1220  Chamber  of  Commerce,  Chicago,  111. 

Dolese  Bros.  Co.,  128  N.  LaSalle  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Ohio  & Indiana  Stone  Co.,  Indianapolis,  Ind.  (quarry  at  Greencastle, 
Ind.) 

0.  M.  Fulwider,  Bloomington,  Ind. 

Some  of  these  companies  furnish  fine-ground  limestone  and  some 
furnish  limestone  screenings,  which  include  both  very  fine  dust  and  some 
coarse  particles  even  as  large  as  corn  kernels.  In  carload  lots  the  price 
on  board  cars  at  the  plant  varies  from  50  cents  to  $1  a ton  according  to 


18 


fineness.  The  freight  charges  are  one-half  cent  per  ton  per  mile,  with  a 
minimum  charge  of  25  cents  per  ton  by  each  railroad  handling  the  car, 
and  with  a minimum  carload  of  30  tons.  At  most  points  in  Illinois  the 
cost  delivered  in  bulk  in  box  cars  should  be  between  $1  and  $2  a ton. 
Sometimes  one  can  get  one  and  one-half  tons  of  material  containing  one 
ton  of  fine  dust  and  half  a ton  of  coarser  particles,  varying  in  size  from 
less  than  pinheads  to  corn  kernels,  at  no  greater  expense  than  would  be 
required  for  one  ton  of  fine-ground  stone  containing  no  coarser  particles. 
The  coarser  particles  will  last  in  the  soil  longer  than  the  finer  material, 
which  is  rapidly  lost  by  leaching:  and  a product  that  will  all  pass  thru  a 
sieve  with  8 or  10  meshes  to  the  linear  inch,  and  that  contains  all  of  the 
fine  dust  produced  in  the  process  of  crushing  or  grinding,  is  very  satis- 
factory. 

Portable  machines  for  crushing  and  grinding  limestone,  using  thresh- 
ing engines  for  power,  can  be  oblained  from — 

Williams  Patent  Crusher  & Pulverizer  Co.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Universal  Crusher  Co.,  Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa. 

Pennsylvania  Crusher  Co.,  Pittsburgh,.  Pa. 

Wheeling  Mold  & Foundry  Co.,  Wheeling,  W.  Va. 

Jeffrey  Manufacturing  Co.,  Columbus,  Ohio. 


Machine  for  Spreading  Limestone  and  Phosphate 

Directions  for  making  a machine  for  spreading  ground  limestone 
and  ground  rock  phosphate  are  given  in  Circular  HO.  which  will  be  sent 
to  anyone  upon  request.  This  is  a homemade  machine,  using  the  wheels 
of  an  old  mower,  and  it  can  be  made  by  any  good  blacksmith  and  carpen- 
ter. 

There  is  no  regular  manufactured  machine  on  the  market  that  has 
given  as  satisfactory  service  in  our  experience  as  these  homemade 
machines.  They  are  made  upon  order  by  many  blacksmiths  in  different 
parts  of  the  state,  and  the  following  parties  usually  keep  machines  in 
stock  for  sale : 

George  Kubacki,  DuBois,  111. 

Pana  Enterprise  Manufacturing  Company,  Pana,  111. 


20 


$165.52  $173.17  $255.44  $169.66  $251.43  $170.57  $256.92  254.76 


Bloomington  Experiment  Field:  Crop  Values  For  Eleven  Years 


“R”  means  residues  of  crops  (corn  stalks,  straw,  and  clover) 
plowed  under  to  maintain  nitrogen  and  organic  matter. 

“P”  means  phosphorus,  the  cost  of  which  is  represented  by 
that  part  of  the  diagram  above  the  short  cross  marks.  It  has 
paid  back  $3  for  each  dollar  invested. 

“K”  means  potassium,  which  has  paid  back  3 cents  for  each 
dollar  spent  for  it. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  SEPTEMBER,  1913 


CIRCULAR  No.  168 

(Second  Edition,  Illustrated,  October,  1913) 


BREAD  FROM  STONES 

By  Cyrii,  G.  Hopkins 


An  Acre  of  Wheat, 
l^nd  treated  with 
Manure, Limestone  <N 


An  Acre  of  Wheat- 
Land  treat  eel  Y 
With  farm  .Manure 


Phosphate 


“Replenish  the  earth,  and  subdue  it.”  Genesis , i 128. 


BREAD  FROM  STONES 


By  Cyrii,  G.  Hopkins 
Chief  in  Agronomy  and  Chemistry 

In  November,  1903,  I purchased  a farm  in  southern  Illinois  at 
a cost  of  less  than  $20  an  acre.  It  comprised  about  300  acres  of 
poor  gray  prairie  land  (the  commonest  type  of  soil  in  about  twenty 
counties  in  that  part  of  the  state)  and  a few  acres  of  timber  land. 
It  was  christened  “Poorland  Farm”  by  others  who  knew  of  its  im- 
poverished condition,  and  I finally  adopted  this  as  the  farm  name. 

In  1913  a 40-acre  field  of  this  farm  produced  1320  bushels  of 
wheat;  and,  because  of  numerous  requests  for  information  re- 
garding the  treatment  that  has  been  given  the  land,  the  Director 
of  the  Experiment  Station  has  suggested  that  this  circular  be  is- 
sued. 

This  particular  forty  acres  was  bought  at  $15  an  acre.  It  had 
been  agriculturally  abandoned  for  five  years  prior  to  1904,  and 
was  covered  with  a scant  growth  of  red  sorrel,  poverty  grass,  and 
weeds. 

During  the  subsequent  ten  years,  this  field  has  been  cropped 
with  a six-year  rotation  including  one  year  each  of  corn,  oats  (or 
cowpeas),  and  wheat,  and  three  years  of  meadow  and  pasture  with 
clover  and  timothy.  A fairly  good  stand  of  volunteer  clover  ap- 
peared with  the  oats  in  1911  and  this  was  allowed  to  produce  a 
crop  of  clover  hay  in  1912,  wheat  being  seeded  in  the  fall  of  that 
year  for  the  1913  crop  mentioned  above. 

During  the  ten  years,  about  4 tons  per  acre  of  ground  lime- 
stone and  2 tons  per  acre  of  fine-ground  raw  rock  phosphate  have 
been  applied  to  37  acres  of  this  field.  Two  applications  have  been 
made  of  each  material ; the  phosphate  was  plowed  down  for  the 
corn  crops  of  1904  and  1910,  and  the  limestone  was  applied  in  the 
fall  and  winter  of  1904-5  and  after  the  ground  was  plowed  for 
wheat  in  the  fall  of  1912. 

The  entire  40-acre  field  was  covered  with  one  uniform  appli- 
cation of  six  loads  per  acre  of  farm  manure,  a 50-bushel  spreader 
being  used  for  the  purpose. 

A 6-rod  strip  extending  entirely  across  the  field  (80  rods)  re- 
ceived the  same  application  of  manure  and  the  same  rotation  of 


3 


4 


crops  as  the  remaining  37  acres,  but  no  phosphate  was  applied  to 
this  strip,  and  no  limestone  was  applied  to  it  until  the  fall  of  1912, 
when  the  regular  application  (about  2 tons  per  acre)  was  made  to 
one-half  (3  rods)  of  the  6-rocl  strip. 

Only  39  acres  of  this  field  were  seeded  to  wheat  in  the  fall  of 
1912,  a lane  having  been  fenced  off  on  one  side;  and  the  1320 
bushels  were  produced  on  the  39  acres. 

The  actual  yields  were  as  follows : 

1^/2  acres  with  farm  manure  alone  produced  11^2  bushels  per  acre. 

1V2  acres  with  farm  manure  and  one  application  of  ground  limestone 
produced  15  bushels  per  acre. 

36  acres  with  farm  manure  and  two  applications  of  ground  limestone  and 
two  of  fine-ground  phosphate  produced  35^  bushels  per  acre. 


Pirate  1. — Wheat,  with  Farm  Manure  Aeone 
. (Compare  with  Opposite  Page) 


The  cost  of  two  tons  of  limestone  delivered  at  my  railroad  sta- 
tion is  $2.25,  and  raw  rock  phosphate  has  averaged  about  $6.75 
per  ton,  making  $9  per  acre  the  cost  for  each  six  years. 

To  this  must  be  added  the  expense  of  hauling  these  materials 
two  miles  from  the  station  and  spreading  them  on  the  land,  which 
is  estimated  at  50  cents  per  ton.  This  makes  the  average  annual  cost 
$1.75  Per  ^cre  f°r  limestone  and  phosphate  spread  on  the  field, 
and  this  average  annual  investment  resulted  in  the  increase  of  24 
bushels  of  wheat  per  acre  in  1913. 

Thus  we  may  say  that  the  previous  applications  of  these  two 
natural  rocks,  or  stones,  brought  about  the  production  in  1913  of 
864  bushels  of  wheat,  an  amount  sufficient  to  furnish  a year’s  sup- 
ply of  bread  for  more  than  a hundred  people. 


Pirate  2.— Wheat,  with  Farm  Manure, 
Limestone,  and  Rock  Phosphate 


6 


As  a rule  the  check  strips  across  each  of  the  six  40-acre  fields 
in  the  rotation  are  not  harvested  separately  from  the  rest  of  the 
fields,  and  consequently  no  exact  data  can  be  kept  of  the  relative 
effect  of  the  limestone  and  phosphorus  on  the  clover  and  on  the 
wheat.  It  is  perfectly  clear  to  the  eye,  however,  that  the  lime- 
stone and  phosphate  have  produced  even  more  marked  differences 
in  the  clover  than  in  the  wheat,  and  where  the  first  application  of 
limestone  was  made  to  the  3-rod  check  strip,  as  well  as  to  the 
37  acres  receiving"  rock  phosphate,  the  superiority  of  the  phosphate 
and  limestone  together  over  the  limestone  alone  has  been  exceed- 
ingly marked  on  both  the  clover  and  the  wheat;  and  of  course  the 
wheat  and  other  grain  crops  are  benefited  not  only  by  the  lime- 
stone and  phosphate  but  also  by  the  previous  increased  growth  of 
clover  on  the  well-treated  land,  especially  where  the  clover  is  pas- 
tured or  plowed  under. 


Plate  3. — Clover  and  Timothy,  1913 
Manure  Compared  with  Manure,  TvImestone,  and  Phosphate 


7 


Poorland  Farm  is  in  no  sense  an  experiment  station,  and 
neither  is  it  a “show”  farm.  No  use  is  made  of  high-priced  or 
artificial  commercial  fertilizers.  It  is  operated  solely  from  the 
economic  standpoint,  and  with  the  full  understanding  from  the  be- 
ginning that  as  a rule  general  farming  is  not  a highly  profitable 
business,  and  that  it  is  highly  unprofitable  on  poor  land.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  is  equally  well  known  that  intelligent  permanent  soil 
improvement  on  land  that  must  be  or  will  be  farmed  is  both  the 
safest  and  the  most  profitable  investment  open  to  the  farmer  and 
the  landowner.  But  both  the  difficulties  and  the  methods  of  build- 
ing up  rundown  soil  have  been  repeatedly  discussed  by  the  writer, 
in  public  addresses  and  in  published  articles,  bulletins,  and  books, 
and  there  is  no  necessity  of  repeating  them  here. 

Poorland  farm  is  usually  inspected  each  year  by  my  class  of 
University  students  in  soil  fertility,  about  one  hundred  of  whom 
saw  the  fields  of  wheat  and  clover  in  June,  1913.  It  is  for  the 
benefit  of  such  as  these,  who  desire  to  know  the  truth  regarding 
economic  systems  of  permanent  soil  improvement,  that  this  brief 
statement  is  published.  The  farm  is  a purely  private  enterprise 
operated  by  Hopkins  Brothers ; and,  while  interested  visitors  are 
welcome,  they  are  not  invited,  not  met  at  the  train  with  automo- 
biles, and  are  not  entertained.  There  is  no  desire  to  advertise  this 
farm,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  any  light  that  it  sheds  need  not  be 
hidden. 

For  further  information  concerning  the  principles  of  soil  fer- 
tility maintenance  and  improvement,  for  directions  for  making  a 
spreader  with  which  to  apply  ground  limestone  and  ground  rock 
phosphate,  and  for  all  the  addresses  known  tO'  the  Experiment 
Station  of  producers  who  are  prepared  to  furnish  these  materials 
to  Illinois  farmers  and  landowners,  the  reader  is  referred  to  Cir- 
culars no,  “Ground  Limestone  for  Acid  Soils,”  and  167,  “The 
Illinois  System  of  Permanent  Fertility/’  copies  of  which  will  be 
mailed  free  of  charge;  and  if  the  applicant  so  requests,  his  name 
will  be  placed  upon  the  permanent  mailing  list  for  future  publica- 
tions issued  by  the  Agricultural  Experiment  Station. 


Ci,ass  of  Students  Inspecting  the  ‘%ine”  in  the  1912  Ci,ovef  Crop  on  Pooreand  Farm 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  SEPTEMBER,  1913 


CIRCULAR  No.  169 


ECONOMIC  FACTORS  IN  CATTLE  FEEDING 

III.  A REVIEW  OF  BEEF  PRODUCTION  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

By  Herbert  W.  Mumford  and  Louis  D.  Hall 


Ratio  of  Cattle  to  Population,  1870  to  1910 


Summary 


1.  Introduction. — American  beef  production  naturally  divides  into  two 
epochs,  which  may  be  termed  “Early  History”  and  “Recent  Development.”  This 
division  is  marked  by  the  adoption  of  refrigeration  in  shipping  dressed  meat. 

Page  3 

2.  Early  History. — Corn-fed  cattle'  were  first  produced  near  the  begin- 
ning of  the  19th  century  in  southern  Ohio  and  were  driven  overland  to 
be  marketed  in  Baltimore.  Increased  eastern  demand  led  to  a gradual  extension 
of  the  industry  thruout  the  Mississippi  valley  until  checked  by  the  Civil  War. 

Page  3 

3.  Recent  Development. — The  extension  of  railroads  and  the  invention 

of  the  refrigerator  car  in  1868,  followed  by  the  use  of  the  tin  can  in  packing 
meat,  extended  the  beef  production  industry  to  remote  western  states  and  made 
it  possible  to  slaughter  cattle  in  the  West  and  to  market  the  salable  product 
considerably  cheaper.  Page  5 

4.  Numerical  Increase  of  Cattle. — Statistics  show  that  the  number  of 

cattle  on  farms  and  ranges  in  the  United  States  increased  from  20,000,000  in 
1867  to  68,000,000  in  1900,  but  that  during  the  last  ten  years  the  rate  of  increase 
has  diminished  rapidly,  and  the  last  part  of  the  decade  shows  an  actual  de- 
crease in  numbers.  Page  8 

5.  Ratio  of  Cattle  to  Population. — The  number  of  cattle  has  decreased 

but  little  ; however,  the  proportion  of  cattle  to  population  was  only  75  percent 
in  1910  compared  to  84  percent  in  1890.  This  decrease  has  been  accentuated  by 
the  rapid  increase  in  population.  Page  9 

6.  Ratio  of  Beef  Production  to  Surplus. — The  value  of  the  cattle  in  the 

United  States  has  increased  $129,000,000  in  seven  years.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  decline  in  the  number  of  cattle  in  proportion  to  population  has  reduced  the 
export  of  meat  products  from  $72,435,000  to  an  almost  negligible  amount  dur- 
ing the  same  period.  Page  9 

7.  Cattle  Classified  by  Age  and  Sex. — A census  of  the  cattle  by  age, 

sex,  and  value  indicates  among  other  facts  that  approximately  60  percent  of 
the  cows  of  breeding  age  are  considered  dairy  cows.  Page  10 

8.  Geographical  Distribution  of  Cattle  in  the  United  States. — A com- 
parison of  the  distribution  of  the  cattle  (other  than  milch  cows)  and  the  popu- 
lation shows  that  while  more  than  two-thirds  of  the  cattle  are  west,  more  than 
two-thirds  of  the  population  is  located  east  of  the  Mississippi  river.  Page  11 

9.  Development  of  the  Great  Cattle  Markets. — Cattle  markets  develop 

in  the  wake  of  the  producing  areas.  This  is  indicated  by  the  growth  of  Chicago 
and  cities  west  of  Chicago,  as  cattle  markets,  while  eastern  cities  have  declined 
as  cattle  markets.  Page  13 

10.  Local  Sale  and  Slaughter  of  Cattle. — The  large  central  markets  are 

of  primary  interest  to  the  feeder.  Reliable  statistics  gathered  in  1903  indicate 
that  only  half  the  13,000,000  cattle  marketed  for  slaughter  that  year  were  slaught- 
ered in  large  central  markets.  Page  16 

11.  The  Passing  of  the  Range. — The  range  country  is  undergoing  a 

transition  during  which  the  number  of  cattle  is  decreasing,  but  an  increased 
production  is  promised  in  the  future.  Page  17 

12.  Mexican  and  Canadian  Cattle  Ranges. — Mexico  offers  opportunities 

for  great  development,  but  a decade  or  more  will  be  required  to  reconstruct  the 
country  and  develop  its  latent  possibilities.  Western  Canada  is  rapidly  being 
taken  up  by  homesteaders  who  give  little  attention  to  stock  raising  at  present. 
Eventually  Canada  and  Mexico  should  become  important  factors  in  the  world’s 
beef  supply.  Page  23 

13.  Beef  Production  in  the  South. — Various  handicaps  have'  prevented 
the  southern  states  from  exerting  much  influence  upon  the  beef  industry,  but 
better  conditions,  the  need  of  crop  rotation,  and  the  many  natural  advantages 
for  stock  raising  are  now  tending  to  promote1  the  southern  cattle  industry. 

| ! Page  26 

Note. — This  is  the  third  of  a series  of  circulars  dealing  with  economic  fac- 
tors in  cattle  feeding.  (I.  Relation  of  the  United  States  to  the  World’s  Beef  Sup- 
ply. II.  Argentina  as  a factor  in  International  Beef  Trade.)  Following  publica- 
tions will  treat  of  cattle-feeding  conditions  in  the  corn  belt,  and  cattle  feeding  in 
its  relation  to  farm  management  and  soil  fertility. 


A REVIEW  OF  BEEF  PRODUCTION  IN  THE 
UNITED  STATES 


By  Herbert  W.  Mumford,  Chief  in  Animal  Husbandry,  and 
Louis  D.  Hall,  Assistant  Chief  in  Animal  Husbandry 


One  hundred  years  have  elapsed  since  beef-cattle  production  be- 
came a prominent  feature  of  American  agriculture.  A study  of  the 
tendencies  that  have  marked  the  development  of  the  industry  dur- 
ing that  period  throws  much  light  upon  present  and  prospec- 
tive conditions  with  which  the  cattle  feeder  has  to  deal.  In  this 
brief  sketch,  general  developments  only  can  be  considered,  and  the 
more  recent  decades  will  receive  chief  attention. 

Two  comparatively  distinct  periods  constitute  the  history  of  beef 
production  in  this  country.  Up  to  the  Civil  War,  cattle  feeding  ac- 
companied general  agriculture  in  its  gradual  extension  westward 
thru  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  valleys.  At  the  same  time,  the  graz- 
ing industry  spread  from  Texas  over  the  great  western  plains.  Im- 
mediately after  the  war  an  enlarged  beef  demand  in  the  East,  to- 
gether with  improved  facilities  for  the  transportation  of  cattle  and 
distribution  of  beef,  stimulated  the  production  and  marketing  of 
beef  cattle  and  marked  the  beginning  of  modern  conditions.  The 
general  divisions  of  this  review,  therefore,  may  be  designated  as 
the  “Early  History”  and  the  “Recent  Development”  of  the  beef 
industry. 

EARLY  HISTORY 

Pioneers  from  the  Allegheny  region,  and  especially  from  the 
Virginias,  introduced  the  grazing  and  corn  feeding  of  beef  cattle 
into  the  valleys  of  southern  Ohio  and  northwestern  Kentucky  near 
the  beginning  of  the  19th  century.  In  1805  the  first  fat  cattle  were 
driven  by  Felix  Renick  from  the  then  new  country  of  the  Scioto 
valley,  Ohio,  350  miles  eastward  across  the  Alleghenies  to  Balti- 
more, where  they  found  a profitable  market.  During  the  next  de- 
cade the  trailing  of  cattle  was  extended  to  Philadelphia  and  New 
York.  The  establishment  of  an  outlet  and  the  growth  of  the  east- 
ern demand  for  beef  stimulated  the  cattle  business  in  the  Ohio 
valley  region  and  gradually  extended  it  westward  over  Kentucky, 
Indiana,  and  Illinois.  Until  the  early  fifties,  it  was  customary  to 
take  cattle  to  market  on  foot.  In  many  instances,  this  meant  a 
drive  of  a thousand  miles,  requiring  ten  to  twelve  weeks.  Indeed 
it  was  not  uncommon  for  cattle  to  be  driven  to  the  large  eastern 
cities  from  points  as  far  west  as  Iowa  and  as  far  south  as  Texas. 


3 


4 


One  of  the  first  shipments  of  cattle  by  rail  from  Kentucky  to 
eastern  markets,  made  in  1852,  is  described  by  the  shipper  as  fol- 
lows : “One  week  was  consumed  in  driving  the  cattle,  100  in  num- 
ber, from  the  neighborhood  of  Lexington,  Kentucky,  to  Cincinnati. 
Here  they  were  loaded  in  box  cars  and  shipped  by  rail  to  Cleveland, 
whence  they  were  taken  by  steamboat  to  Buffalo.  After  a stay  of 
several  days  at  Buffalo,  the  animals  were  driven  to  Canandaigua, 
New  York;  thence  were  hauled  in  immigrant  cars  to  Albany,  where 
they  were  unloaded  in  the  freight  house.  After  spending  two  days 
in  a feed  yard  near  Albany,  the  stock  was  taken  by  boat  to  New 
York.  The  freight  on  these  cattle  from  Cincinnati  to  Buffalo  was 
at  the  rate  of  $120  per  car  and  the  total  expense  from  Kentucky  to 
New  York  was  $14  per  head.”  About  1855  shipments  by  rail  were 
made  from  Indiana  to  New  York,  and  in  the  same  year  began  the 
shipment  of  cattle  from  Chicago.  The  westward  extension  of  rail- 
roads during  the  next  decade  resulted  in  a proportionate  increase 
in  rail  shipments  of  cattle  eastward  and  gave  rise  to  various  slaught- 
ering and  shipping  centers  in  the  Middle  West. 


FiQ-  1. — Routes  of  Rarity  Shipments  of  CaTTi^ 


5 


Coincident  with  the  extension  of  beef  production  from  east  to 
west  was  the  expansion  of  the  industry  from  the  Mexican  border 
thru  Texas  and  northward.  Mexicans  settling1  in  Texas  brought 
with  them  large  numbers  of  Mexican  or  Spanish  cattle  and  made 
ranching  their  leading  occupation.  The  peculiar  adaptation  of  the 
vast  prairies  of  western  and  northern  Texas  to  cattle  raising,  be- 
cause of  their  luxuriant  mesquite  and  buffalo  grass,  abundant 
streams,  and  mild  climate,  soon  attracted  large  numbers  of  stock- 
men  from  all  parts  of  the  United  States;  and  by  1815  these  early 
stockmen  were  the  leading  ranchmen  of  this  section.  During  the 
next  few  decades  and  until  the  Civil  War,  the  herds  increased  with 
great  rapidity;  but  the  outlet  for  cattle  was  restricted  by  the  distance 
from  market  and  the  lack  of  railroads.  At  this  time  they  were 
marketed  principally  in  New  Orleans,  Mobile,  and  Mexico,  while 
smaller  numbers  were  carried  by  boats  to  cities  along  the  Mississippi 
river.  The  latter  trade  was  cut  off  by  the  Civil  War,  and  this,  to- 
gether with  the  impoverished  condition  of  the  South,  virtually  de- 
stroyed the  market  for  Texas  cattle.  The  industry  was  abandoned 
to  a large  extent,  and  cattle  became  almost  worthless,  some  chang- 
ing hands  at  $1  to  $2  per  head.  There  was  no  demand  for  many 
that  were  offered,  and  some  herds  were  abandoned  on  the  range. 
“As  an  evidence  of  the  low  value  of  cattle  in  Texas  at  this  period, 
it  is  recorded  that  a buyer  went  into  a herd  of  3500  steers  and  cut 
out  $600  at  $6  a head,  and  600  more  at  $3  a head.”1 

Statistics  of  cattle  in  the  United  States  during  the  first  two- 
thirds  of  the  century  are  almost  entirely  lacking,  and  such  as  are 
available  must  be  regarded  as  rough  estimates.  Consequently,  it  is 
difficult  to  record  the  development  of  beef  production  during  that 
period  further  than  to  outline  its  general  tendencies. 

RECENT  DEVELOPMENT 

During  the  five-year  period  following  the  Civil  War,  several 
significant  factors  combined  to  revolutionize  the  beef-cattle  business 
in  the  United  States.  Rapid  increase  in  population  and  the  devel- 
opment of  manufacturing  industries  in  the  East  and  North  brought 
about  a new  demand  and  a larger  outlet  for  beef.  Railroad  exten- 
sion thruout  the  Middle  West  made  possible  the  establishment  of 
central  markets  which  became  accessible  to  beef-cattle  producers  at 
long  distances. 

In  1857  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  Railroad  was  extended  from 
Cincinnati  to  St.  Louis.  Here  it  connected  with  the  Missouri  Pa- 
cific, which  was  then  under  construction  from  St.  Louis  to  Kansas 
City.  Altho  this  latter  road  was  started  soon  after  1850,  it  was  not 
finished  until  1865.  At  the  same  time  the  completion  of  the  Han- 
nibal and  St.  Joseph  between  the  Mississippi  and  Missouri  rivers 


IB.  O.  Cowan,  Breeder’s  Gazette,  Jan.  22,  1913,  p.  193. 


6 


established  rail  service  between  Kansas  City  and  Chicago.  Conse- 
quently, when  it  was  planned  to  extend  the  Kansas  Pacific  still  far- 
ther westward,  the  southwestern  cattlemen,  with  access  to  both  the 
Chicago  and  the  St.  Louis  markets  in  sight,  saw  a bright  future  for 
their  industry. 

In  Texas  and  the  western  states,  the  effect  of  improved  condi- 
tions and  better  marketing  facilities  was  marked.  The  wide  dif- 
ference in  the  market  price  of  cattle  in  the  North  and  in  the  South 
opened  a profitable  outlet  for  the  southwestern  herds,  and  a strong 
movement  of  Texas  cattle  to  northern  markets  soon  developed.  By 
1870  three  principal  routes  to  eastern  markets  had  become  estab- 
lished. “One  way  led  by  coastwise  steamer  to  New  Orleans,  whence 
the  animals  were  taken  northward  on  river  boats.  At  Cairo,  Illi- 
nois, the  railroad  journey  was  begun  northward  to  Chicago,  thence 
to  the  East.  A second  route  from  Texas  was  over  a trail  to  shipping 
points  on  the  Red  river,  whence  the  cattle  were  forwarded  on  steam- 
boats to  Cairo,  thence  to  be  shipped  by  rail  northward.  A third 
route  followed  the  trails  from  Texas  to  feeding  grounds  along  the 
railroads  in  Kansas  and  in  regions  farther  north.  From  stations 
along  these  railroads  the  animals  were  forwarded  to  eastern  mar- 
kets."1 

The  northern  demand  for  these  southwestern  cattle,  due  to  im- 
proved methods  of  slaughtering  animals,  the  use  of  refrigeration  in 
shipping  dressed  beef,  and  the  utilization  of  packing-house  by-pro- 
ducts, increased  enormously  about  1870.  Accordingly,  the  opening 
of  a railroad  shipping  station  at  Abilene,  Kansas,  in  1867,  marked 
the  beginning  of  heavy  shipments  of  southwestern  cattle  to  St. 
Louis,  Chicago,  and  the  East.  About  35,000  head  were  shipped 
from  Abilene  in  1867,  75,000  in  1868,  150,000  in  1869,  300,000  in 
1870,  and  600,000  in  1871. 2 Some  of  the  cattle  enumerated  above 
were  grazed  and  wintered  on  the  ranges  of  western  Kansas  ready 
to  take  advantage  of  a favorable  market.  The  severe  winter  of  1871 
put  a check  on  this  movement.  “This  was  the  flood  year  of  cattle 
drives  from  Texas,  and  it  is  estimated  that  600,000  cattle  arrived  in 
western  Kansas  that  season.  Many  of  them  were  young  stock  cat- 
tle, and  a large  number  of  the  steers  intended  for  market  were  in 
thin  flesh  and  could  not  be  made  fat  that  summer  and  fall  because  of 
excessive  rains  and  the  washy  condition  of  the  grass.  The  supply 
brought  forward  was  greatly  in  excess  of  the  demand,  and  in  conse- 
quence, prices  dropped.  Many  herds  were  held  on  the  prairies  un- 
til late  autumn,  waiting  for  buyers.  It  is  thought  that  300,000  of 
that  season’s  drive  had  to  be  wintered  in  Kansas.  As  this  had  not 

1U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1908,  p.  231. 

sCattle  Trade  of  the  West.  J.  G.  McCoy.  Pp.  106,  179,  225,  226. 


7 


been  foreseen,  no  preparation  for  it  had  been  made.”1  It  was  es- 
timated that  250,000  cattle  died  from  exposure  on  the  range  during 
that  winter.  During  the  following  season  only  about  300,000  head 
were  driven  north;  but  in  1873  the  trade  revived  because  of  in- 
creased demand,  and  approximately  450,000  Texas  cattle  were 
driven  into  Kansas.  Gradually  the  practice  of  taking  southwestern 
cattle  to  the  northern  ranges  of  Colorado,  Wyoming,  and  Montana 
increased,  and  continued  during  the  70’s  and  8o’s.  In  1884  it  was 
estimated  that  415,000  head  were  trailed  over  this  route.  Follow- 
ing that  date,  railroads  developed  more  rapidly  and  carried  a large 
proportion  of  the  cattle  to  northern  pastures,  and  by  1890  the  old 
trails  were  abandoned. 

Along  with  better  facilities  for  shipping  live  cattle  came  im- 
proved methods  for  transporting  dressed  beef  and  beef  products. 
The  invention  of  the  refrigerator  car  in  1868  made  it  possible  to 
slaughter  cattle  in  the  West  and  ship  the  dressed  beef  to  the  large 
eastern  cities  and  to  Europe.  Thus  the  fresh-meat  trade  extended 
over  the  summer  season  as  well  as  the  four  cold  months  to  which  it 
had  been  previously  confined.  This  invention  greatly  reduced  the  cost 
of  transportation  besides  making  it  possible  for  the  packers  to  oper- 
ate thruout  the  entire  year.  For  example,  from  Chicago  to  New  York 
in  1908  the  freight  and  other  expenses  of  the  road  on  an  export 
steer  of  average  weight  (1250  pounds)  varied  from  $4  to  $4.40, 
while  the  freight  on  the  carcass  of  the  same  animal  (700  pounds) 
was  only  $3.15,  not  including  the  expense  of  icing.  From  Kansas 
City  to  New  York  the  difference  between  live  and  dead  freight  was 
still  greater,  amounting  possibly  to  $2.25  or  $2.50  per  head.  The 
total  cost  of  shipping  a live  steer  from  Chicago  to  Liverpool,  in- 
cluding freight,  feed,  and  attendance  is  estimated  to  have  been 
$13.60  to  $16.70,  or  considerably  more  than  double  the  cost  of  ship- 
ping the  average  weight  of  fresh  beef  yielded  by  the  animal.2 

Fresh  beef  was  first  shipped  in  a refrigerator  car  from  Chicago 
to  Boston  in  September,  1869,  but  it  was  not  until  1875  that  this  sys- 
tem became  well  developed.  About  the  same  time,  the  tin  can  was 
introduced  into  the  meat-packing  industry  and  it  contributed  still 
further  to  the  successful  shipment  of  beef  products  to  markets  in 
distant  parts  of  the  world.  The  utilization  of  previously  wasted 
by-products  for  the  manufacture  of  valuable  products  also  began  to 
receive  close  attention.  These  factors,  together  with  the  settlement 
and  extension  of  the  cattle-producing  regions  of  the  West,  the  build- 
ing of  railroads,  and  the  development  of  agriculture  and  industry 
in  general,  combined  to  mark  the  most  important  turning  point  in 
the  annals  of  American  beef  production. 

iB.  O.  Cowan,  Breeder’s  Gazette,  Jan.  22,  1913,  p.  193. 

2U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1908,  p.  243. 


8 


Numerical  Increase  oe  Cattle 

Statistics  indicate  that  the  number  of  cattle  rapidly  increased 
from  decade  to  decade  up  to  1900.  Since  that  time,  it  shows  evi- 
dence of  having  declined,  altho  the  figures  obtainable  for  this  later 
period  are  hardly  comparable  with  those  of  the  previous  decade. 
These  facts  are  illustrated  by  Table  1.  It  will  be  observed  that  the 
number  of  cattle  other  than  milch  cows  is  approximately  60  percent 
of  the  total  number  of  cattle. 


Tabde  1.— Cattbe  on  Farms  and  Ranges,  1867  to  19121 


Year 

Total  cattle, 
number 

Cattle  other  than 
milch  cows, 
number 

Increase  in  total 
cattle  by  decades, 
percent 

1867 

20  000  000 

12  000  000 

1870 

25  000  000 

15  000  000 

25 

1880 

33  000  000 

21  000  000 

32 

1890 

53  000  000 

37  000  000 

38 

1900 2 

68  000  000 

45  000  0003 

28 

1910 

69  000  000 1 

47  000  000 

2 

62  000  0004 

41  000  000 

- 8.7 

19125 

58  000  000 

37  000  000 

!U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1910,  p.  630. 

2 Abstract  of  the  12th  Census,  p.  238. 

3 Estimated. 

4Abstract  of  13th  Census,  “Live  Stock  on  Farms,”  p.  316. 
Statistical  Abstract  of  U.  S.,  1911,  p.  155. 


Before  passing  this  table,  an  explanation  should  be  given  for 
the  two  sets  of  data  for  1910.  The  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry  es- 
timates the  number  of  animals  in  the  country  on  January  1 of  each 
year,  and  in  1910  this  estimate  was  69,000,000.  While  this  number 
is  quite  accurate,  it  is  approximate,  and  so  is  not  comparable  with 
the  more  carefully  gathered  census  figures.  The  census  report  of 
62,000,000  cattle,  while  accurate,  is  not  comparable  to  previous  cen- 
sus reports,  due  to  the  time  of  year  that  the  data  were  gathered.  In 
'1900,  the  census  was  taken  June  1,  while  in  1910  it  was  taken  April 
15 — a difference  of  six  weeks  at  the  season  of  the  year  when  the 
largest  numbers  of  farm  animals  are  born.  The  inaccuracy  of  di- 
rectly comparing  the  1910  census  report  with  previous  census  fig- 
ures is  shown  by  the  following  statement  made  in  an  abstract  from 
the  1910  census  report.  After  estimating  that  from  five  to  six 
million  calves  would  have  been  born  from  April  15  to  June  1,  1910, 
and  that  probably  one  or  two  million  of  the  older  cattle  would  have 
been  slaughtered  or  otherwise  disposed  of,  the  report  continues: 
“Instead,  therefore,  of  a decrease  in  the  total  number  of  cattle 
from  67,719,000  on  June  1,  1900,  to  61,804,000  on  April  15,  1910, 
a decrease  of  not  more  than  three  million,  and  possibly  not  over 
one  million,  would  have  resulted  had  the  enumeration  of  1910 


9 


been  made  as  of  June  i.”  This  statement  indicates  only  a small  de- 
crease in  the  actual  number  of  cattle  during  the  past  ten  years,  but 
this  decrease  is  significant  when  the  present  demand  is  taken  into 
consideration. 


Ratio  of  Cattle;  to  Population 

Altho  the  cattle  of  the  United  States  have  increased  numerically 
by  decades  up  to  the  present  time  (with  the  probable  exception  of 
the  last  few  years),  their  number  has  not  kept  pace  with  the  grow- 
ing population  during  the  last  two  ten-year  periods  (see  Table  2). 
In  1890  the  number  of  cattle  was  equal  to  84  percent  of  the  popula- 
tion, while  in  1910  it  was  at  most  no  higher  than  75  percent,  and  in- 
dications are  that  the  ratio  is  rapidly  diminishing  at  the  present 
time.  The  number  of  cattle  as  compared  with  population  is  more 
striking  when  it  is  considered  that  while  the  number  of  cattle  in  1910 
at  best  may  have  been  on  a par  with  the  number  in  1900,  the  popu- 
lation between  those  same  years  increased  21  percent  and  there  is 
little  tendency  toward  an  abatement  in  this  rate  of  increase.  How- 
ever, the  most  recent  reports  indicate  that  the  number  of  beef  ani- 
mals is  on  an  actual  decrease  at  present. 


Table  2.— Ratio  of  Cattle  to  Population,  1870  to  19101 


Year 

Total  cattle 
per  capita 

Cattle  other  than 
milch  cows, 
per  capita 

1870 

.64 

.39 

1880 

.66 

.42 

1890 

.84 

.59 

1900 2 

.89 

.66 

19102 

.67 

.45 

iBased  upon  Abstract  of  the  13th  Census,  pp.  24,  316;  U.  S.  Dept  of  Agr., 
Yearbook  1910,  p.  630;  Abstract  of  12th  Census,  p.  32. 

2Based  upon  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry  figures.  Total  cattle  per  capita  for 
1900  was  .58,  for  1910,  .75;  cattle  other  than  milch  cows  per  capita  in  1900  was 
.36,  in  1910,  .51. 

Ratio  of  Bfe;f  Production  to  Surplus 

A natural  consequence  of  the  decline  in  the  relative  number  of 
cattle  as  compared  with  population  has  been  a diminution  in  both 
the  relative  and  the  actual  surplus  of  beef  cattle  and  beef  products. 
Comparing  the  annual  value  of  cattle  other  than  milch  cows  with 
the  annual  value  of  exports  of  beef  cattle  and  beef  products  at  ten- 
year  intervals,  we  find  a marked  decline  in  the  percentage  value  of 
the  surplus,  and  it  is  evident  from  the  following  table  that  in  this 
country  the  consumption  of  beef  has  practically  overtaken  its  pro- 
duction. 


10 


Tabee  3. — Vaeue  of  Cattee  on  Farms  and  of  Exports  of 
Beef  Cattee  and  Beef,  1867  to  1912 


Year 

Farm  value  of 
cattle  other  than 
milch  cows1 

Value  of  beef  cattle  and 
beef  exports2 

Percent  of 
value 
exported 

1867 

$185  254  000 

$2  143  000 

1.2 

1870 

290  401  000 

2 693  000 

.9 

1880 

341  761  000 

31  544  000 

9.2 

1890 

560  625  000 

56  170  000 

10.0 

1900 

689  486  000 

68  407  000 

9.9 

1905 

661  571  000 

72  435  000 

10.9 

1908 

845  938  000 

55  466  000 

6.6 

19103 

917  453  000 

24  400  000 

2.7 

19124 

790  064  000 

14  602  000 

1.8 

*U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1909,  p.  571. 

2Calculated  from  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Bur.  of  Statistics,  Bui.  75,  pp.  23-29. 
3U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1911,  p.  629. 

4U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1912,  pp.  681,  726. 


Cattle  Classified  by  Age  and  Sex 

In  Table  4 are  given  the  numbers  and  percentages  of  the  vari- 
ous classes  of  cattle  on  farms  and  ranges  in  the  United  States,  April 
15,  1910,  and  also  a comparison  of  the  average  value  of  the  cattle  of 
the  different  classes. 


Tabee  4 Cattee  in  United  States,  Aprie  15,  19101 


On  farms 
and  ranges, 
number 

Percent 
of  all 
cattle 

Value 

Value 
per  head 

Calves  born  after  Jan  1, 

1910  (under  3%  mo.).  .. 

7 806  539 

12.6 

$ 52  000  133 

$ 6.66 

Steers  and  bulls  born  in 

1909  (3^-l5K  mo.) 

5 450  289 

# 8-8l 

Steers  and  bulls  born  be- 

\ 

347  901  174 

26.66 

fore  1909  

7 598  258 

12.3  j 

Heifers  born  in  1909  (3 y2- 

15 y2  mo.) 

7 295  880 

11.8 

103  194  026 

14.14 

Cows  and  heifers  not  kept 

for  milk,  born  before 

1909  

12  023  682 

19.5 

269  160  193 

22.39 

Cows  and  heifers  kept  for 

milk,  born  before  1909.. 

20  625  432 

33.4 

706  236  307 

34.24 

Unclassified 

1 003  786 

1.6 

21  031  774 

20.95 

Total 

61  803  866 

100.0 

$1  499  823  607 

Av.$24. 27 

lAbstract  of  13th  Census,  “Live  Stock  on  Farms,”  pp.  313,  314. 


11 


Several  interesting  facts  are  revealed  by  the  above  figures.  Al- 
most two-thirds  of  the  cows  of  breeding  age  are  designated  as  dairy 
cows,  the  remainder  being  kept  primarily  for  raising  beef  calves. 
The  ratio  of  bulls  and  steers  to  cows  and  heifers  is  i to  1.46.  An 
explanation  of  the  small  number  of  calves  as  compared  with  the 
number  of  breeding  cow's  is  given  on  page  8.  Unfortunately,  the 
data  are  such  that  no  comparison  can  be  made  between  the  values  of 
cattle  of  the  same  sex  at  different  ages  nor  between  the  values  of 
steers  and  heifers  of  the  same  age.  However,  a comparison  can  be 
made  between  the  values  of  dairy  and  beef  cows,  the  former  being 
worth  almost  $12  per  head  more  than  the  latter. 

Geographical  Distribution  of  Cattle  in  the  United  States 

The  accompanying  map  shows  graphically  the  relative  import- 
ance of  each  group  of  states  in  numbers  and  money  value  in  the  pro- 
duction of  cattle  other  than  milch  cows,  in  1910.  In  addition  to 
the  data  brought  out  upon  the  map,  Table  5 gives  the  total  number 
and  value  of  cattle  other  than  milch  cows  for  the  entire  United 
States  at  the  time  of  the  last  census  and  the  average- value  per  head. 

In  the  north  central  states,  from  Ohio  to  Nebraska,  and  in  the 
region  including  Oklahoma  and  Texas  are  found  the  greatest  rela- 
tive numbers  of  cattle.  However,  owing  to  wide  variation  in  type 
and  quality,  numbers  are  only  a partial  indication  of  the  importance 
of  cattle  raising  in  the  various  sections ; the  value  per  animal  must 
also  be  taken  into  consideration. 


Table  5. — Number  and  Value  oe  Cattle  other  than  Milch  Cows 
in  the  United  States,  April  15,  19101 


Section 

Number 

Average  price 

Total  value 

North  Atlantic  .... 

2 130  000 

$16.54 

$35  234  000 

South  Atlantic 

3 029  000 

13.79 

41  760  000 

North  Central  west 
of  the  Mississipi. . 

12  320  000 

22.12 

272  538  000 

North  Central  east 
of  the  Mississipi. . 

4 990  000 

18.57 

92  669  000 

Southern  and  Gulf. . 

10  786  000 

16.28 

175  574  000 

Far  Western i 

7 925  000 

22.15 

175  512  000 

Total ! 

41  180  000 

(Av.$19.28) 

$793  287  000 

1 Calculated  from  Abstract  of  13th  Census,  “Live  Stock  on  Farms,”  p.  316. 


12 


Fig.  2 — Number  and  Vaeue  oe  Cattee  other  than  Miech  Cows  in  the  United  States,  Aprie  15,  1910 


13 


The  average  value  of  beef  cattle  in  the  Atlantic  and  south  cen- 
tral states  is  shown  to  be  comparatively  low.  Altho  the  north  central 
states  have  only  41  percent  of  the  cattle  of  the  country  (other  than 
milch  cows)  numerically,  the  aggregate  value  of  such  cattle  in  these 
states  is  more  than  46  percent  of  the  total  value. 

The  so-called  “corn-belt”  states — Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Iowa, 
Missouri,  Nebraska,  and  Kansas — have  about  one-third  of  the  cat- 
tle other  than  milch  cows  in  the  United  States,  but  they  represent 
more  than  one-third  the  value  of  such  cattle  in  the  country.  In  ad- 
dition to  the  cattle  regularly  enumerated,  upon  which  the  preceding 
statement  is  based,  we  must  consider  the  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
feeding  cattle  that  are  annually  brought  into  the  corn  belt  to  be  fat- 
tened. Including  this  supply  of  cattle,  and  considering  their  qual- 
ity and  value,  perhaps  one-half  the  beef-producing  industry  of  the 
country  is  centered  in  the  seven  states  mentioned. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  while  more  than  two-thirds  of  the 
cattle  represented  on  the  accompanying  map  are  west  of  the  Missis- 
sippi river,  more  than  two-thirds  of  the  population  of  the  United 
States  is  in  states  east  of  the  Mississippi.  In  1880,  78  percent  of 
the  population1  was  east  and  more  than  one-half  (about  55  percent) 
of  the  cattle2  west  of  the  Mississippi. 

Another  striking  comparison  is  that  of  the  manufacturing  and 
the  non-manufacturing  sections  of  the  United  States.  At  the  time  of 
the  last  census,  more  than  one-half  of  the  population  was  found  in 
less  than  one-seventh  of  the  area  of  the  country,  viz.,  the  states  east 
of  the  Mississippi  and  north  of  the  Ohio  and  Potomac  rivers.  This 
portion  of  the  country  produces  more  than  three- fourths  of  our 
manufactured  products,  pays  more  than  four-fifths  of  all  salaries 
and  wages,  and  contains  more  than  two-thirds  of  the  assessed  value 
of  all  real  and  personal  property.  It  is  therefore  the  great  consum- 
ing area  of  the  country;  but  (east  of  Chicago)  it  has  less  than  one- 
eighth  of  the  beef  cattle  and  less  than  one-fifth  of  all  cattle  of  the 
United  States.  In  other  words,  seven-eighths  of  the  beef  cattle  and 
four-fifths  of  all  cattle  are  produced  west  and  south  (principally 
west)  of  the  manufacturing  district.  Consequently,  there  has  been 
an  enormous  movement  of  cattle  from  west  to  east  to  supply  the  de- 
mand for  beef  in  the  more  densely  populated  sections.  This  has 
brought  about  the  establishment  of  the  great  cattle  markets  at  Chi- 
cago, the  “Missouri  river  points” — Kansas  City,  St.  Louis,  Omaha, 
St.  Joseph,  Sioux  City  and  South  St.  Paul. 

Development  oe  the  Great  Cattle  Markets 

A study  of  the  growth  of  the  important  market  centers  sheds 
much  light  on  the  development  of  the  cattle-raising  industry  of  the 

^Abstract  of  the  12th  Census,  pp.  32,  33. 

2U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Bureau  of  Statistics,  Bui.  64,  p.  57. 


14 


country.  Comparing  the  annual  receipts,  in  round  numbers,  at  ten- 
year  intervals  since  1870,  we  have  the  summary  given  in  Table  6. 
(The  markets  are  arranged  in  the  order  of  receipts  for  1910.) 

A study  of  these  market  records  shows  clearly  the  extent  to 
which  western  slaughtering  has  replaced  the  shipment  of  live  cat- 
tle to  eastern  cities.  The  markets  at  Chicago,  Missouri  river 
points,  St.  Paul,  Ft.  Worth,  and  Denver  have  grown  rapidly,  while 
a number  of  eastern  markets  (e.g.,  Buffalo  and  Pittsburg)  show 
a marked  falling  off. 

The  recent  development  of  the  far- western  markets  Denver 
and  Ft.  Worth  is  especially  noteworthy.  Large  markets  are  also 
being  developed  at  Seattle,  Portland  (Oregon),  and  San  Francisco 
which  will  contribute  still  further  toward  local  slaughter  in  the 


Tabee  6 Number  oe  Cattee  Received  at  Large  Markets, 

1870  to  19101 


Market 

18701 2 

1880 2 

18902 

19003 

19104 

Chicago 

533  OOO 

1 382  000 

3 484  000 

2 729  000 

3 053  000 

Kansas  City. 

121  0005 6 

245  000 

1 472  000 

1 970  000 

2 230  000 

Omaha  

87  OOO6  7 

607  OOO7 

828  000 

1 223  OOO7 * 

St.  Louis  . . 

234  OOO7  8 

346  OOO7 

511  OOO7 

698  OOO4 

1 207  OOO7 

Ft.  Worth.  . . 

90  000 

785  OOO 

New  York. . . 

683  OOO4 

674  OOO4 

630  OOO4 

615  000 

St.  Joseph  . . 

28  OOO7  9 

380  000 

510  000 

St.  Paul 

32  00010 

93  000 

176  000 

482  000 

Sioux  City  . . 

55  OOO7  10 

167  OOO7 

300  000 

411  000 

Denver 

54  0007  11 

114  OOO7 

240  000 

383  000 

Indianapolis. 

119  OOO7  12 

133  OOO7 

120  OOO7 

140  000 

309  000 

Cincinnati. . . 

128  0004  8 

189  OOO4 

172  OOO4 

177  000 

257  000 

Buffalo 

654  000 

220  000 

Pittsburg  . . 

251  000 

150  000 

Baltimore  . . . 

163  000 

142  000 

Philadelphia 

165  OOO 

Jersey  City. . 

228  000 

Boston  

227  OOO4 

168  OOO4 

178  OOO4 

128  000 

Louisville . . . 

94  OOO4 

126  000 

Portland,  Or. 

90  000 

Seattle 

10  OOO13 

19  OOO13 

55  OOO13 

Note. — Omissions  in  this  table  are  due  to  the  fact  that  statistics  were  not 
obtainable,  either  because  a market  had  not  been  established  or  because  no 
records  were  kept. 


1 Calves  not  included. 

2Bureau  An.  Indus.  Rept.,  1897,  pp.  209-239. 

3 Bureau  An.  Indus.  Rept.,  1900,  pp.  569-583. 

4Chicago  Drover’s  Journal  Yearbook,  1911.  Stock  Yards  Co.  reports. 

51871. 

6 1884. 

^Includes  calves. 

81874. 

^Statistical  Abstract  of  U.  S.,  1910,  p.  495. 

10 1888. 

11 1886. 

121878. 

i3Estimated. 


15 


West  and  thereby  diminish  the  relative  number  of  live  cattle  shipped 
eastward.  The  factors  that  have  brought  about  this  great  move- 
ment, chief  of  which  are  railroad  development,  the  refrigerator 
car,  and  the  tin  can,  have  been  discussed  in  a preceding  paragraph 
(page  7). 

In  order  to  comprehend  the  relative  importance  of  the  markets 
included  in  the  foregoing  table  and  the  relation  of  each  market  to 
the  cattle  trade  of  the  country,  we  should  know,  not  only  the  num- 
ber of  cattle  received,  but  also  the  number  shipped  out  and  the 
proportion  of  stockers  and  feeders  in  the  shipments.  Table  7 is 
therefore  presented  to  give  these  facts,  so  far  as  they  are  available, 
regarding  the  various  markets. 

Comparing  the  large  markets  as  slaughtering  centers,  according 
to  the  number  of  cattle  actually  utilized,  as  shown  in  the  first  col- 
umn, we  find  that  they  rank  in  approximately  the  same  order  as 
when  compared  on  the  basis  of  gross  receipts,  with  a few  marked 
exceptions.  Chicago  ranks  first  and  is  followed  by  the  five  Mis- 
souri river  points,  together  with  Ft.  Worth  and  St.  Paul,  after 
which  come  Cincinnati,  Denver,  and  Indianapolis. 

St.  Paul  shows  the  largest  proportion  of  shipments  to  receipts. 
This  is  due  to  the  fact  that  many  range  cattle  enroute  to  Chicago 


Tabee  7.— Receipts  at  and  Shipments  from  Large  Markets  in  1910 


Market 

Net  receipts1 

Proportion  of 
shipments  to 
gross  receipts, 
percent 

Stockers 
and  feeders 
shipped 

Proportion  of 
stockers  and 
feeders  to  ship- 
ments, percent 

Chicago 

1 741  000 

43 

406  000 

31 

Kansas  City 

1 286  000 

42 

[631  000 

66 

St.  Louis 

897  00  ) 

31 

101  000 

27 

Omaha  

799  000 

35 

432  0008 

102 

Ft.  Worth 

529  000 

33 

St.  Joseph 

355  000 

30 

59  000 

38 

Sioux  City 

200  000 

51 

178  000 

84 

Cincinnati 

188  000 

27 

Indianapolis  .... 

169  000 

45 

St.  Paul 

146  000 

70 

251 f 000 

71 

Denver3 

Buffalo 

130  000 

Pittsburg3 

Louisvilie 

63  000 

50 

42  0004 

66 

New  York3  

Jersey  City3 

Baltimore  

63  000 

55 

Boston 

61  000 

52 

Portland,  Ore .... 

51  000 

43 

Seattle3  . . .. 

San  Francisco3  . . 

iReceipts  minus  shipments, 
includes  feeders  driven  out. 
3 Statistics  not  obtainable. 
4Estimated. 


16 


are  fed  in  transit  at  that  market.  Sioux  City  and  Denver  like- 
wise are  feeding  points  for  cattle  enroute  to  northern  ranges,  and 
thus  record  large  percentages  of  cattle  shipped.  Of  the  larger 
markets  Chicago  shows  the  greatest  proportion  of  shipments  to 
receipts,  due  to  the  number  of  feeding  cattle  handled  and  the 
extensive  movement  of  fat  cattle  from  that  market  to  eastern 
cities  that  formerly  included  many  export  cattle.  Kansas  City 
also  ships  over  two-fifths  of  the  cattle  it  receives.  In  general, 
the  proportion  of  shipments  to  receipts  at  the  different  markets 
varies  from  one-third  to  two-thirds. 

Referring  to  the  last  two  columns,  it  is  observed  that  Kansas 
City  outrivals  all  other  centers  as  a feeder  market,  both  as  to  the 
actual  number  shipped  out  and  the  proportion  of  feeders  to  total 
shipments.  Omaha  occupies  second  place  and  is  regarded  by  corn- 
belt  cattlemen  as  a rapidly  growing  feeder  point.  The  excess  of 
feeders  over  total  shipments  at  Omaha  is  due  to  the  large  number 
of  feeding  cattle  driven  out  of  the  yards  and  not  counted  in  ship- 
ments.  As  to  the  actual  number  of  feeders  shipped,  Chicago  ranks 
close  to  Omaha,  altho  less  than  one-third  of  the  cattle  shipped  from 
Chicago  are  feeders.  The  high  percentage  of  feeders  in  ship- 
ments from  Sioux  City,  Denver,  and  St.  Paul  consists  largely  of 
cattle  fed  in  transit,  as  explained  above. 

The  source  of  receipts  and  the  destination  of  shipments  are  re- 
corded at  the  Kansas  City  market.  In  1907,  59  percent  of  the 
cattle  were  consigned  from  Kansas,  15  percent  from  Oklahoma, 
11  percent  from  Missouri,  6 percent  from  Texas,  and  the  re- 
mainder principally  from  Colorado,  New  Mexico,  and  Nebraska. 
Of  the  cattle  shipped  in  the  same  year,  12  percent  went  to  Missouri 
(besides  St.  Louis),  10  percent  to  Kansas,  5 percent  to  Illinois  (be- 
sides Chicago),  4 percent  to  Iowa,  15  percent  to  various  large  mar- 
kets, and  the  remainder  to  various  other  states.1 

. Export  trade  accounts  for  the  comparatively  small  net  receipts 
of  some  of  the  eastern  markets  whose  gross  receipts  are  large. 
The  importance  of  these  markets  as  points  of  export  is  illustrated 
by  the  figures  for  the  year  ending  June  30,  1908,  when  the  cities 
of  Boston,  New  York,  Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  Portland  (Maine), 
and  Detroit,  named  in  order  of  their  importance,  exported  299,000 
cattle.2  In  1910  the  export  trade  from  these  same  cities  was 
much  lighter,  totaling  122,000  cattle,  or  only  40  percent  of  the  ex- 
port trade  in  1908.3 

Local  Sals  and  Slaughter  os  CattlS 

Altho  cattle  feeders  are  primarily  interested  in  and  affected  by 
the  large  central  markets,  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  a com- 

1U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1908,  p.  234. 

2U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1908,  p.  236. 

3 Commerce  and  Navigation  of  the  U.  S.,  1910,  p.  776. 


17 


paratively  large  number  of  cattle  are  converted  into  beef  by  local 
butchers,  and  the  influence  of  this  factor  in  the  aggregate  is  consid- 
erable. It  was  estimated  by  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Corpora- 
tions1 that  the  cattle  slaughtered  in  1903  were  divided  thus: 

No.  of  cattle 
slaughtered 


At  large  central  markets  6,570,000 

In  other  cities  over  50,000  population  930,000 

In  cities  and  villages  under  50,000  population 3,500,000 

On  farms  and  ranges 1,500,000 

Total  slaughtered  12,500,000 

Exported  alive  520,000 

Total  13,020,000 


Nearly  6,000,000  cattle,  or  about  45  percent  of  those  marketed 
for  slaughter  (which  includes  those  exported  alive),  were  therefore 
slaughtered  at  points  other  than  the  large  stockyard  centers;  and 
of  this  number  5,000,000,  or  40  percent  of  the  total  number 
slaughtered,  were  slaughtered  in  small  cities  and  villages  and  in 
the  country.  In  other  words,  about  two-fifths  of  all  cattle  killed 
for  beef  in  1903  were  handled  by  local  butchers  and  farmers.  The 
Bureau  of  Corporations  also  ascertained  that  about  5,500,000,  or 
45  percent,  of  the  cattle  killed  for  beef  were  slaughtered  by  six 
companies  known  as  the  “big  packers.” 

The  Passing  oe  the  Range 

A large  part  of  the  agricultural  progress  of  the  past  has  meant 
the  extension  of  soil  cultivation  at  the  expense  of  the  grazing  in- 
dustry that  preceded  it.  Home-seeking  emigrants,  leaving  behind 
farms  that  have  been  devastated  by  poor  management,  have 
pushed  forward  continually  toward  the  most  fertile  western  graz- 
ing areas,  absorbing  or  driving  the  cattle  and  sheep  to  new  terri- 
tory, until  now  the  limits  of  the  United  States  have  been  reached. 
Large  ranches  which  formerly  sent  train  loads  of  fat  and  feed- 
ing cattle  to  the  central  markets  and  to  corn-belt  feeders  have  been 
completely  absorbed  by  settlers.  Formerly,  such  a condition  meant 
the  establishment  of  ranches  in  new,  unclaimed  lands,  but  further 
extension  of  this  kind  is  impossible. 

The  effect  of  western  emigration  upon  future  beef  produc- 
tion is  a disputed  question.  Some  regard  a marked  shortage  of 
cattle  as  the  inevitable  result;  others  claim  that  the  cultivation  of 
new  lands  will  ultimately  increase  the  production  of  cattle  in  such 
sections.  However,  a gradual  increase  in  cattle  will  not  neces- 
sarily mean  a greater  shipment  of  beef  animals  from  these  regions 
eastward,  for  the  meat  consumption  of  these  newer  western  states 
will  increase  along  with  the  increase  of  population.  Neither  will 

1 Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Corporations  on  the  Beef  Industry,  1905, 

PP-  55-57- 


18 


an  increase  of  cattle  mean  a larger  beef  production,  for  the  dairy 
cow  soon  makes  her  appearance  in  large  numbers  in  the  thickly- 
populated  sections. 

From  the  foregoing  statements  it  will  be  seen  that  beef  produc- 
tion has  a very  uncertain  future.  The  free  grazing  lands  that  re- 
main are  in  an  unsatisfactory  condition  because  of  indiscriminate 
grazing  and  a scramble  to  secure  what  is  left  of  the  already  de- 
pleted ranges.  No  business  is  so  full  of  annoying  difficulties  as 
the  handling  of  cattle  on  the  remaining  free  ranges;  and  it  is  little 
wonder  that  stockmen  have  grasped  the  opportunity  to  quit  business 
as  quickly  as  prices  warranted  such  a change.  It  would  seem  that 
adequate  laws  have  not  yet  been  provided  for  the  control  of  pub- 
lic range  lands. 

The  setting  aside  of  large  areas  of  the  public  domain  as  na- 
tional forest  reserves,  in  the  opinion  of  some  men  has  been 
beneficial  to  the  grazing  industry.  Thru  the  issuing  of  grazing 
permits  and  the  collection  of  fees,  the  Forest  Service  seeks  to 
show  that  “regulated  grazing  and  fewer  numbers  spell  more  ac- 
tual profit  than  over-grazing  and  hungry  cattle.”1  In  the  effort  to 
prevent  over-stocking,  fewer  cattle  are  permitted  on  some  sections 
of  the  forest  reserves  than  those  ranges  are  capable  of  carrying. 

The  section  known  as  the  range  country  is  included  principally 
in  the  states  of  Texas,  Oklahoma,  New  Mexico,  Colorado,  Wyom- 
ing, Montana,  Idaho,  Utah,  Arizona,  the  Dakotas,  and  the  west- 
ern portions  of  Kansas  and  Nebraska,  as  shown  on  the  accompany- 
ing map.  In  order  to  observe  the  course  of  development  of  the 
cattle  industry  in  different  sections  of  the  West,  the  following 
statistics  are  given,  representing  the  number  of  cattle  other  than 
dairy  cows  in  the  various  states  of  the  range  country. 


Tabee  8. — Number  oe  Cattee  in  Various  Western  States,  1870  to  1910 


State 

1870 

1890 

1900 

1910 

Texas 

3 220  000 

7 024  000 

8 567  000 

7 131  000 

Oklahoma . . . 

121  0001 

1 544  000 

1 637  000 

New  Mexico . 

375  0002 

1 341  000 

975  000 

901  000 

Colorado  . . . 

365  0003 

1 017  000 

1 333  000 

1 425  000 

Wyoming  . . . 

780  000 2 

1 096  000 

669  000 

959  000 

Montana  .... 

590  000 3 

933  000 

923  000 

842  000 

Idaho  

195  000 2 

382  000 

312  000 

340  000 

Utah 

103  0003 

384  000 

278  000 

327  000 

Arizona 

145  0002 

725  000 

725  000 

626  000 

Dakotas 

220  0002 

740  000 

1 808  000 

1 957  000 

Total 

5 993  000 

13  763  000 

17  134  000 

16  145  000 

1 1893. 
21882. 
31877. 


ijohn  H.  Hatton,  Breeder’s  Gazette,  Aug.  30,  1911,  p.  329. 


19 


Fig.  3.— Location  of  the  Range  Country1 


Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  above  figures  are  partly  es- 
timates and  were  made  at  different  times  of  the  year,  they  are 
sufficiently  accurate  to  represent  the  general  trend  of  conditions. 

A marked  increase  in  cattle  is  shown  in  each  state  from  1870 
to  i8qo.  This  was  the  period  that  saw  the  establishment  and 
growth  of  the  big  bonanza  cattle  ranches  thruout  the  entire  West; 
when  beef  cattle  “kings”  were  at  the  height  of  their  prosperity. 
During  the  next  decade  further  increases  are  to  be  noted  in  Texas, 


1U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1908,  p.  232. 


20 


0161  I 
0061 


0681  B 


0161  «BBHBHHBHBBBi 

0061  ■BHHHnBBHBHHB 
0681  mWSMMMMBBMMM— 

8881 


1 


O 

N 

5 


c 


0161 


0061 


0681 


8881 


0161  | 
0061 
0681  m 


8881 


ot6i  wKmMBmssmm 

0061  ■■BBHB 

0681  

8881 


0161 


0061 


0681 


8881 


mm 


i 

f 

£ 


0161 
0061  | 
0681 


LL  81 


0181 
0061  Hi 
0681 


8881 


0161 

0061 


O 

§ 

K 

O 

J 

o 

d° 

o 


Fig.  4. — Number  of  Cattee  in  Various  Western  States,  1870  to  1910 


21 


Oklahoma,  Colorado,  and  the  Dakotas,  while  the  remaining  range 
states  show  a decrease  or  remain  practically  unchanged. 

From  1900  to  1910  a marked  decrease  occurred  in  Texas,  and 
smaller  declines  in  New  Mexico,  Arizona,  and  Montana  ; all  other 
states  mentioned,  particularly  Wyoming  and  the  Dakotas,  show  an 
increase.  These  decreases,  first  in  the  northern  range  states,  then 
in  the  southern,  were  due,  in  large  part  at  least,  to  the  passing  of 
the  four-year-old  steer.  By  marketing  stock  at  three  years  of  age, 
instead  of  four,  an  entire  generation  of  cattle  was  eliminated  from 
the  western  country.  This  fact  alone  is  enough  to  account  for  a 
considerable  falling  off  in  the  number  of  cattle  even  tho  the  yearly 
calf  crops  were  increasing  in  size.  It  should  also  be  kept  in  mind 
that  considerable  shifting  of  stock  from  one  state  to  another  was 
constantly  taking  place  in  the  range  country.  Consequently,  a de- 
crease in  one  state  would  be  practically  balanced  by  an  increase 
in  another.  However,  it  appears  from  these  figures  that  the  recent 
tendency  has  been  toward  liquidation  of  cattle  on  the  southwest- 
ern ranges,  while  in  the  Northwest  as  a whole  the  number  of 
cattle  has  remained  practically  at  a standstill.  This  decrease  is  made 
more  evident  when  it  is  considered  that  the  maximum  number  of 
cattle  in  these  western  states  was  reached  in  1906,  when  the  total 
number  was  estimated  at  18,057,000.  Since  that  date,  there  has 

1870  ■■■■■■■  5,993,000 

1890  i3,763,ooo 


1895 

1900 

1901 

1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 


11,359.000 

nm  17,134,000 
HHHI  15,955.000 
HHHHi  18,712,000 
HHBHHHH  16.518,000 
■■■■■i  16,736,000 
S&HHHHI  16,722,000 


1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

1910 


■■  18,057.000 

■ 17,190,000 

■ 1^088,000 

16.350.000 

16.145.000 


Fig.  5. — Aggregate  Number  oe  Cattee  in  Various  Western  States, 

1870  to  1910 


22 


been  a gradual  decrease  in  numbers,  but  not  a corresponding  de- 
crease in  the  amount  of  beef  produced. 

It  is  a prevalent  belief  of  those  who  are  in  a position  to  judge, 
that  the  number  of  range-breeding  cattle  has  recently,  and  is  now, 
diminishing.  Opinions  as  to  future  developments  differ  widely 
and  are  influenced  largely  by  local  conditions.  Homesteaders  who 
begin  operations  under  adverse  conditions  in  some  sections  of 
the  range  country  will  require  a number  of  years  before  they  will 
be  enabled  to  produce  enough  cattle  to  equal  the  number  they  dis- 
place. In  some  localities  farming  is  restricted  to  valleys  and  other 
limited  areas  capable  of  irrigation  or  the  growing  of  special  crops, 
leaving  large  areas  of  open  range  lands  of  the  poorer  grade.  Un- 
der proper  management,  these  remaining  range  lands  are  capable 
of  a larger  production  than  they  are  at  present  yielding.  In  still 
other  sections,  extensive  areas  unsuited  to  any  purpose  but  graz- 
ing await  more  efficient  management.  Speaking  of  the  western 
range  as  a whole,  the  writers  believe  that  within  a few  years,  if 
not  in  the  more  immediate  future,  the  failure  of  farming  ventures 
in  many  range  districts,  the  value  to  be  derived  from  a small  drove 
of  cattle  on  a well-established  farm  by  the  utilization  of  otherwise 
wasted  roughage,  the  enclosure,  conservation,  and  more  efficient 
management  of  private  and  public  ranges,  the  demand  for  milk 
and  beef  in  growing  western  cities,  and  the  demand  for  feeding 
cattle  in  the  corn-belt  will  result  in  an  expansion  of  cattle  raising 
in  the  range  district;  provided,  of  course,  present  market  prices 
continue,  and  judging  from  the  present  demand  this  seems  probable. 

Altho  the  receipts  of  range  cattle  at  large  markets  have  been 
quoted  to  depict  range  conditions,  they  are  not  a correct  criterion 
of  present  conditions.  Quite  naturally  the  increase  in  the  western 
population  and  the  growth  of  such  markets  as  Omaha,  Ft.  Worth, 
Denver,  and  Portland,  have  redpced  the  number  of  range  cattle 
annually  received  at  Chicago  and  other  older  markets.  It  is 
readily  seen  that  the  somewhat  gradual  decrease  in  range-cattle 
receipts  at  Chicago  from  886,000  in  1890  to  376,000  in  1910  has 
been,  in  large  part,  the  result  of  the  increase  of  population  and 
the  growth  of  slaughtering  centers  thruout  the  range  country. 
Figures  which  might  be  quoted  from  various  western  markets  in 
no  way  take  into  account  the  cattle  which  are  slaughtered  in  small 
outlying  towns  and  are  used  locally  to  supply  the  rapidly-increas- 
ing population  in  many  of  the  newer  sections  of  the  western  coun- 
try. With  the  settlement  of  the  western  range  lands  by  the  small 
grain  farmers,  there  is  a growing  tendency  to  utilize  a part  of  the 
crop  in  fattening  cattle  for  local  markets.  This  may  seem  a small 
factor  in  any  one  section  of  the  West,  but  taken  in  the  aggregate 
for  many  states,  it  becomes  a large  factor  in  the  disposal  of  west- 
ern cattle.  It  is  not  argued  that  there  has  been  no  reduction  in  the 
number  of  cattle  in  the  United  States,  or  even  in  the  West.  How- 
ever, “the  passing  of  the  range”  is  many  times  used  with  too  much 


23 


emphasis, — and  well  might  it  continue  to  be  so  used  if  it  would  en- 
courage a larger  production  of  cattle.  Might  it  not  better  be  said 
that  the  rapid  increase  in  population,  rather  than  the  decrease  in 
cattle,  has  been  the  chief  factor  in  bringing  about  the  present  de- 
mand for  meat,  and  that  because  of  this  condition  the  demand  will 
continue  to  grow,  and  this  should  stimulate  a larger  beef  production. 

Mexican  and  Canadian  CatteE  Ranges 

In  attempting  to  forecast  the  future  cattle  supply  of  the  West, 
the  regions  beyond  our  southwestern  and  northwestern  boundar- 
ies must  be  taken  into  consideration.  Defining  the  range  country, 
Mr.  Frank  Hastings  has  said : “The  great  bulk  of  the  American 
continent  lying  west  of  the  98th  meridian,  with  large  tracts  in 
Canada  for  its  northern  portion  and  greater  still  in  Mexico  for  its 
southern  areas,  may  properly  be  called  the  range.”1 

Mexico  has  as  yet  developed  the  production  of  cattle  only  to  a 
small  extent,  and  her  significance  as  a factor  in  cattle  raising  lies 
in  her  latent  possibilities.  The  following  is  quoted  from  Mr. 
Frank  J.  Hagenbarth  of  Utah,  who  developed  the  great  Palomas 
ranch  in  Chihuahua.2  “The  greater  part  of  the  area  of  Mexico 
is  above  the  tick  line  and  all  the  plateaus  leading  to  the  Sierra 
Madre  mountains  are  ideal  for  cattle-breeding  purposes.  Only  the 
river  bottoms  and  the  coast  country  produce  the  bane  of  the  cat- 
tle industry,  the  tick.  The  whole  country  grows  Para  grass  in 
profusion.  It  is  a marvelous  feed,  equal  to  the  bunch  grass  of 
Montana,  succulent  and  highly  nutritious.  The  states  of  Sonora, 
Coahuila,  Durango,  Sinaloa,  and  Chihuahua  not  only  produce  this 
feed  in  great  quantities,  but  boast  of  an  excellent  climate.  Calves 
may  come  at  any  season  of  the  year  and  encounter  no  vicissitude. 
It  must  not  be  presumed  that  no  handicap  exists,  however.  The 
northwest  range  country  has  a severe  winter,  while  Mexico’s 
greatest  obstacle  to  cattle  raising  is  drouth.  But  this  can  be  ob- 
viated by  constructing  dams  and  storing  water  that  falls  during 
the  rainy  season.  The  present  practice,  even  on  such  properties 
as  the  Terrazas  ranches,  is  to  let  cattle  wander  anywhere  from 
ten  to  fifteen  ‘ miles  for  water,  if  they  find  it  then.  I have  met 
few  people  in  Mexico  who  had  even  grasped  the  beef-raising  pos- 
sibilities of  the  country.  A few  Polled  Durham  and  Hereford 
bulls  have  been  taken  in,  but  little  effective  effort  can  be  detected, 
and  any  impression  that  northern  Mexico  is  in  a position  to  flood 
the  United  States  markets  with  cattle  of  any  kind  is  erroneous.” 

Packers  report  that  cattle  purchased  in  Mexico  compare  well 
with  the  northern  United  States  range  cattle  that  reach  the  Chi- 
cago market.  However,  Mexico  has  not  yet  realized  the  possi- 
bilities for  the  production  of  either  cattle  or  sheep,  and  there  can 


1 American  Breeder’s  Association,  Annual  Rept.,  Vol.  I,  p.  208. 

2Breeders  Gazette,  June  21,  1911,  p.  1453. 


24 


be  no  great  immediate  improvement.  At  least  ten  years  will  be 
required  to  restore  the  damage  done  by  the  insurrection. 

That  Mexico'  is  a growing  factor  affecting  our  own  range-cat- 
tle industry  is  shown  by  the  number  of  cattle  brought  across  the 
Mexican  line  into  the  United  States  during  recent  years.  For 
example,  the  number  of  cattle  imported  from  Mexico  in  1905  was 
22,000;  in  1906,  24,000;  in  1907,  27,000;  in  1908,  64,000;  in 
1909,  126,000;  in  1910,  1 88,000. 1 These  cattle  are  grazed  on 
ranges  thruout  the  West.  They  have  been  taken  as  far  north  as 
Montana  and  even  Canada  but  are  held  principally  in  the  South- 
west until  marketable  as  killers  or  feeders. 

Conditions  in  the  Canadian  range  country  are  well  described 
in  a recent  report  by  Hon.  J.  G.  Rutherford,  Veterinary  Director 
General  and  Live  Stock  Commissioner  of  Canada,  from  which  the 
following  extracts  are  quoted : 

“As  is  well  known,  the  Canadian  west  is  now  experiencing  the  same  change 
in  cattle-raising  methods  as  has  already  taken  place  in  much  of  the  country 
south  of  the  line,  formerly  devoted  to  ranching  purposes. 

“The  ranching  industry  in  Canada  is  rapidly  passing.  In  Saskatchewan 
and  Alberta  the  handwriting  is  already  on  the  wall,  and  in  these  provinces  it  is 
only  a matter  of  time  until  even  the  districts  still  regarded  as  unfit  for  general 
agriculture  will,  thru  modern  methods  of  dry  farming  or  by  means  of  irrigation, 
• be  brought  under  cultivation.  In  the  Peace  River  country  ranching  may  per- 
sist for  a time,  but  there,  as  elsewhere  on  the  continent,  the  settler  will  soon 
be  its  undoing  and  the  cowboy  will  disappear. 

“The  incoming  of  settlers,  many  of  them  from  the  dry  belt,  has  transformed 
large  areas  of  land,  formerly  considered  only  fit  for  ranching,  into  fertile  farms 
growing  great  crops  of  grain  and  fodder.  While  there  is  yet  much  territory  un- 
touched by  the  settler  and  on  which  the  cattle  still  range  as  formerly,  its  area 
is  being  yearly  curtailed,  and,  as  a natural  consequence,  the  free,  easy  and 
somewhat  wasteful  methods  of  the  rancher  are  gradually  giving  place  to  those 
of  the  farmer  and  feeder.  That  this  change  will,  instead  of  lessening  the  out- 
put, eventually  result  in  a large  increase  in  the  cattle  production  of  the  trans- 
formed districts,  needs  no  demonstration.  Under  ranching  conditions,  twenty 
acres  is  the  usual  allowance  for  each  head  of  cattle,  while  the  losses  from  ex- 
posure, from  lack  of  food  and  from  wild  animals  constitute  a heavy  drain  on  the 
herd. 

“The  close  farmers  are,  as  yet,  in  the  minority  in  the  less  thickly  settled 
portions  of  Alberta  and  Saskatchewan.  There  is  still  much  open  grazing  land 
available  and  many  settlers  let  their  cattle  run  at  large  during  the  summer,  thus, 
for  the  present  as  it  were,  combining  ranching  with  farming.  As  time  goes  on 
and  the  land  becomes  more  generally  taken  up1,  this  condition  will  dissappear,  as 
it  has  already  done  in  many  districts  in  Manitoba,  as  well  as  in  the  newer  west, 
and  the  farmer  will  have  to  depend  for  his  feed  on  the  output  of  his  own  acres. 

“At  the  present  date,  while  many  of  the  larger  ranches  have  closed  out,  the 
cattle  industry  is  by  no  means  at  an  end.  It  is  true  that  many  cattlemen,  seeing 
the  inevitable  end  of  ranching,  have  been  rapidly  ‘beefing’  out  their  herds  by 
selling  cows,  spaying  heifers  and  disposing  of  bulls,  but  this  is  only  a link  in 
the  chain  connecting  the  old  with  the  new  and  better  condition  of  the  industry. 
The  determination  to  ‘beef  out’  has  temporarily  increased  the  output  of  cattle 
of  range  quality,  but,  while  this  is  going  on,  the  incoming  settlers  are  stocking 
up,  not  to  return  to  the  old  system  of  selling  their  cattle  off  the  grass  in  the  fall, 
but  to  follow  the  more  profitable  method  of  finishing  beef  thruout  the  year  for 
the  good  markets,  as  is  done  in  other  progressive  countries,  where  beef  raising 
is  recognized  as  a legitimate  and  useful  adjunct  to  mixed  farming.” 


30.) 


iCommerce  and  Navigation  of  the  U.  S.,  1910,  p.  161.  (Years  ending  June 


25 


Thus  the  history  of  the  United  States  range  country  is  being 
repeated  or  even  carried  to  a greater  extreme  in  Canada.  The 
large  ranges  are  giving  way  to  the  grain  farmer,  who  eventually 
may  and  probably  will  adopt  a system  of  mixed  farming.  At  pres- 
ent the  country  is  short  of  breeding  cattle,  but  the  people  are  awak- 
ening to  the  opportunity  for  cattle  raising.  The  serious  side  of 
the  settlement  of  western  Canada  by  grain  farmers  is  shown  by 
the  following  report  of  the  Winnipeg  cattle  market: 


Total  cattle 

Shipped  to 

Ontario 

Year 

received 

Feeding  cattle 

Butcher  cattle 

1909 

170,000 

unknown 

unknown 

1910 

191,000 

39,750 

40,000 

1911 

102,700 

16,875 

unknown 

1912 

95,000 

825 

5,500 

During  this  same  period  the  export  trade  dropped  from  90,000 
in  1908  to  1,500  in  .1912.  While  a part  of  the  decrease  in  cattle 
marketed  may  be  due  to  a shifting  of  demand  to  western  centers, 
it  seems  evident  that  the  liquidation  of  western  Canadian  cattle 
has  assumed  large  proportions. 

The  condition  of  the  range  industry  was  described  in  striking 
terms  by  a representative  western  cattleman  at  the  National  Live 
Stock  Convention  in  February,  1908,  when  he  said:  “No  one  at 
all  familiar  with  the  ranching  industry  will  hesitate  to  state  that 
it  is  in  a condition  of  rapid  decline,  dying  as  dec.entlv  and  as 
quickly  as  it  is  financially  able  to  do.  It  is  not  yet  dead,  however ; 
there  were  still  in  force  in  the  four  western  provinces,  on  April 
1,  1908,  Q59  .grazing  leases,  involving  3,259,271  acres  divided  as 
follows:  Manitoba,  12,642  acres;  Saskatchewan,  632,493  acres; 
Alberta,  2,132,718  acres;  British  Columbia,  281,418  acres.  The 
average  area  under  lease  is  3,481  acres.  It  would  therefore  appear 
that  there  are  still  a good  many  cattle  kept  under  the  old  condi- 
tions, even  when  the  sheep  and  horse  leases  are  taken  into  consider- 
ation. ” 

In  the  past,  Canada  has  been  a large  producer  of  grain,  the 
bulk  of  which  was  shipoed  from  the  country.  The  older  farming 
areas  are  alreadv  reaping  the  sin  of  such  practice — that  of  de- 
creased soil  fertility.  Canada  cannot  grow  such  a large  variety  of 
crops,  and  especially  legumes,  as  are  found  in  the  United  States, 
and  consequently  the  up-keep  of  the  soil  is  much  more  dependable 
upon  stock  raising  than  it  is  in  the  United  States.  Upon  the 
realization  of  the  above  facts  and  of  the  scarcity  of  feeding  cat- 
tle, many  eastern  Canadian  farmers  are  turning  to  stock  raising. 
This  should  result  in  a steadily  increasing  production  of  meat  ani- 
mals. As  with  Mexico  and  other  countries,  no  immediate  result 
can  be  expected  in  so  far  as  beef  production  is  concerned.  A check 
in  the  slaughter  of  calves,  about  which  so  much  is  said,  would  re- 
quire from  eighteen  to  thirty  months  in  which  to  finish  these  same 
animals  as  high-grade  beef  or  to  increase  the  size  of  the  breeding 


26 


herd,  so  that  by  this  method  it  would  require  at  least  from  five  to 
ten  years  of  concerted  effort  to  bring  about  a marked  and  permanent 
increase  in  the  number  of  cattle  marketed. 

Bkef  Production  in  the:  South 

The  early  extensive  beef  production  followed  the  lines  of  least 
resistance  or  of  greatest  profit  with  least  expense  of  labor  and 
capital.  It  remains  for  the  present  stockmen  to  develop  to  the 
fullest  the  latent  possibilities  of  land  once  passed  by  for  greater 
opportunity  elsewhere  in  so  far  as  beef  production  was  concerned. 
Some  sections  of  the  country  have  not  raised  large  numbers  of  cat- 
tle because  other  farming  pursuits  offered  greater  temporary  in- 
ducements. This  is  especially  true  of  the  South,  meaning  those 
states  regarded  as  the  cotton  states. 

Formerly,  cotton  offered  such  enormous  profit  that  it  was 
continually  produced  upon  the  same  land  without  rotating  with  other 
crops,  but  of  late  years,  the  invasion  of  the  boll- weevil  has  demanded 
a system  of  diversified  farming.  The  boll-weevil  cannot  withstand 
intelligent  systems  of  crop  rotation.  To  meet  the  present  needs, 
therefore,  it  is  necessary  to  find  crops  that  will  fit  into  the  ro- 
tation and  yet  be  utilized.  With  the  natural  climatic  conditions 
and  the  thriving  forage  crops  which  will  furnish  feed  the  entire 
year,  many  advocates  of  stock  raising  have  arisen.  A few  years 
past  all  argument  in  behalf  of  cattle  raising  was  balked  by  the 
question,  What  about  the  tick  ? 

The  Texas  fever  tick  has  been  the  ban  to  cattle  raising  in  the 
South.  In  1906  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture 
inaugurated  a movement  to  stamp  out  this  pest.  Strict  quarantine 
of  cattle  was  established  over  fifteen  states  or  parts  of  states  where 
tick  infection  was  prevalent.  During  the  seven  years  that  the  fight 
has  been  in  progress,  1 go, 000  square  miles  of  the  original  740,000 
square  miles  of  infected  area,  or  about  25  percent,  have  been  freed 
of  tick  infestation. 

Just  what  this  war  on  the  tick  has  meant  to  southern  stockmen 
is  shown  in  the  following  digest  of  over  one  hundred  replies  re- 
ceived to  questions  addressed  to  farmers  and  stockmen  in  Missis- 
sippi i1 

1.  What  were  the  approximate  annual  losses  of  cattle  from  tick  fever  in 
your  county  from  1900  to  1909  inclusive?  Answer:  18.5  percent. 

2.  What  was  the  approximate  value  of  all  cattle  that  died  annually?  An- 
swer: $2,132,370. 

3.  What  has  been  the  annual  loss  of  cattle  from  tick  fever  since  the  tick 
eradication  began?  Answer:  1.1  percent. 

4.  What  was  the  average  value  of  three-year  old  steers  in  your  county  from 
1900  to  1909  inclusive?  Answer:  2%  cents  per  pound. 

5.  What  is  the  average  price  now?  Answer:  354  cents  per  pound.  (An  in- 
crease of  35  percent.) 


ij.  A.  Kiernan,  Breeder’s  Gazette,  Feb.  7,  1912,  p.  318. 


27 


6.  Is  there  any  difference  in  the  average  weight  of  cattle  now  and  before 
tick  eradication  began?  Answer:  Yes,  19.7  percent 

7.  Is  there  any  improvement  in  the  grades  of  cattle  in  your  county  since 
the  work  of  tick  eradication  began?  Answer:  Yes. 

8.  Do  you  use  cow  manure  as  fertilizer?  If  so,  state  the  relative  produc- 
tiveness of  land  on  which  it  is  used  as  compared  with  land  on  which  it  is  not 
used.  Answer:  83  percent. 

The  loss  expressed  in  money  terms  may  give  a clearer  concep- 
tion of  the  havoc  played  by  the  fever  tick.  It  is  estimated  that  for 
several  years  previous  to  the  eradication  of  the  tick  in  any  of  the 
infested  areas  of  Mississippi,  18.5  percent,  or  161,000  cattle  in  the 
entire  state,  representing  a value  of  $2,132^370,  died  annually  from 
tick  fever. 

These  statements  regarding  the  benefit  brought  to  the  southern 
states  by  eradicating  the  fever  tick  are  sufficient  to  assure  a greater 
future  for  stock  raising  in  these  sections.  The  success  with  which 
the  eradication  has  been  effected  should  stimulate  many  more 
farmers  to  engage  in  beef  production.  The  secret  of  the  success 
is  the  dipping  tank.  The  cow  acts  as  a carrier  for  the  ticks,  which 
are  found  in  the  pasture  upon  grass  and  weeds.  When  dipping 
is  regularly  practiced,  the  cow  fills  the  role  of  conveyor  of  the 
ticks  from  the  pasture  to  the  dipping  tank  until  at  iast  the  crop 
is  exhausted.  A second  method  of  eradication  is  starvation.  Altho 
it  requires  nine  months  to  starve  the  ticks  which  are  in  the  pasture 
awaiting  the  coming  of  the  host  animal,  this  method  can  be  used 
with  success. 

The  control  of  the  tick  has  opened  a new  vista  for  the  south- 
ern farmer.  Not  only  is  diversified  farming  required  to  control 
the  boll-weevil,  but  also  to  build  up  the  once  fertile  soil  that  has 
become  depleted  by  continual  cropping  and  the  removal  of  the  en- 
tire crop  from  the  farm.  Consequently  successful  stock  raising  of- 
fers a means  of  bringing  the  soil  back  to  its  normal  productivity. 
However,  the  southern  farmers  lack  experience  in  handling  stock, 
and  since  they  are  dependent  upon  negro  labor,  it  will  require  some 
time  to  establish  stock  raising  on  a solid  foundation. 

Many  sections  of  the  South  surpass  the  corn  belt  in  being  able 
to  produce  a greater  variety  of  crops  well  suited  to  live-stock 
production.  Cowpeas,  velvet  beans,  alfalfa,  vetches,  and  clovers 
are  deep-rooting  legumes  which  will  materially  aid  in  putting  the 
soil  in  good  physical  condition.  Shallow  cultivation  has  depleted 
the  surface  soil,  but  good  cultivation  and  the  growing  of  deep-root- 
ing crops  should  place  the  land  on  a productive  basis  within  a few 
years.  The  legumes  and  grasses  will  furnish  forage  the  entire  year 
where  properly  managed,  whereas  at  present  the  number  of  cattle  as 
well  as  other  animals  is  kept  reduced  below  the  carrying  capacity  of 
the  land  because  the  winter  season  is  not  provided  for.  At  present 
the  number  of  cattle  per  square  mile  in  the  South  is  far  below  what 


28 


it  is  in  the  corn  belt,  while  in  reality  much  of  the  southern  land,  due 
to  the  long  growing  season  and  the  heavy  production  of  crops,  is 
capable  of  carrying  much  more  stock  than  could  be  carried  upon  an 
equal  northern  area. 

Not  only  can  stock  be  grown  in  this  section  of  the  country, 
but  there  is  every  opportunity  to  finish  steers  for  the  market.  Corn 
properly  tended  does  quite  as  well  as  it  does  further  north.  Cot- 
tonseed meal  of  course  is  cheap  and  readily  available.  Conse- 
quently, with  corn,  cottonseed  meal,  and  a variety  of  legumes 
available,  the  southern  cattle  feeder  has  all  the  feeds  that  the  corn- 
belt  cattle  feeder  could  desire  for  finishing  cattle.  There  seems 
to  be  no  logical  excuse  for  the  South  not  to  furnish  meat  for  the 
people  within  its  limits,  altho  at  present  large  amounts  of  high- 
priced  meat  products  are  received  from  the  northern  states. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 

Urbana,  Illinois,  June,  1914 


CIRCULAR  No.  171 


Late  Broods  of  The  Codling  Moth 

By  B.  S.  Pickett 


Fig.  i. — Tree  Bandep  IQ  Trap  Codling  Moth  Laevae 


2 


LATE  BROODS  OF  THE  CODLING  MOTH 

By  B.  S.  Pickett,  Assistant  Chief  in  Pomology 

Reports  from  many  parts  of  Illinois  indicate  a very  serious  early 
attack  from  the  apple  growers’  enemy,  the  codling  moth.  The  first 
brood  during  the  present  season  is  far  more  numerous  than  the  first 
brood  of  1913.  In  1913,  in  spite  of  a comparatively  small  early 
infestation,  the  first  brood  was  numerous  enough  to  be  the  progenitor 
of  an  exceedingly  numerous  second  brood,  which  in  its  turn,  in 
southern  Illinois,  at  least,  was  the  progenitor  of  a very  destructive 
third  brood.  Bearing  in  mind  the  sad  losses  of  the  apple  growers 
during  the  season  of  1913  from  late  broods  of  codling  moth,  resulting 
from  a comparatively  early  infestation,  it  is  only  reasonable  to  fear 
that  even  more  serious  losses  may  result  during  the  present  season, 
unless  some  unforeseen  climatic  condition  or  some  unexpected  parasite 
develops  to  check  the  pest. 

The  object  of  this  circular  is  to  call  especial  attention  to  the 
urgent  need  for  strenuous  efforts  to  combat  this  insect  during  the 
present  season.  Two  means  of  control  are  recommended:  spraying 
frequently  and  thoroly  with  arsenate  of  lead,  and  trapping  the  worms 
in  bands  on  the  trunks  of  the  trees. 

Spraying 

The  regular  spray  schedule  for  the  season’s  operations  in  the 
apple  orchard  must  be  supplemented  with  additional  sprays  in  order 
to  keep  the  apples  coated  at  all  times  with  a protective  film  of  poison. 
The  regular  spray  schedule  calls  for  no  application  during  a period 
lasting  from  three,  or  at  most  four,  weeks  after  the  bloom  till  the  first 
or  second  weeks  in  July.  In  the  interval  the  apples  grow  rapidly  in 
size,  and  parts  of  their  surfaces  are  left  temporarily  unprotected. 
Codling  moth  larvae  attempting  to  enter  thru  the  sides  of  the  apples 
can  do  so  without  danger  at  these  unprotected  places.  During  the 
present  season  the  adult  moths  have  been  emerging  thru  a long  period, 
egg  laying  apparently  having  commenced  in  the  southern  part  of 
the  state  early  in  May  and  continuing  to  the  present  time,  June  15. 
The  number  of  larvae  hatching  is  so  numerous  that  even  tho  many 
may  be  killed  in  endeavoring  to  enter  thru  the  poison-filled  calyx  cups, 
or  thru  the  sides  of  the  apples  where  spray  still  remains,  enough  of 
them  find  the  unprotected  surfaces  to  disfigure  great  quantities  of 
fruit  and  render  it  worthless  for  market. 

In  seasons  like  the  present,  therefore,  the  fruit  should  be  thoroly 
sprayed  just  as  soon  as  the  grower  satisfies  himself  that  worms  are 


3 


daily  entering  thru  the  sides  of  the  apples,  regardless  of  the  frequency, 
thoroness,  or  recency  of  the  previous  sprays.  Commonly  the  spray, 
if  applied  during  June,  should  consist  of  6 pounds  of  paste  arsenate 
of  lead,  6 pounds  of  freshly  slaked  lime,  and  100  gallons  of  water.  In 
orchards  where  blotch  is  serious,  it  would  be  well  to  use  Bordeaux 
mixture  with  the  arsenate  of  lead  instead  of  lime. 

The  second  brood  of  codling  moth  begins  to  lay  its  eggs,  in  south- 
ern Illinois,  about  the  first  week  in  July,  and  it  is  necessary  to  spray  at 
this  time  so  that  the  apples  may  present  a surface  completely  pro- 
tected with  a poison  coating.  This  application  is  included  in  the 
regular  spraying  schedule,  a combined  insecticide  and  fungicide 
(arsenate  of  lead  and  Bordeaux  mixture)  being  recommended.  The 
time  of  making  this  spray  becomes  proportionately  later  in  central 
and  northern  Illinois. 

During  the  season  of  1914,  and  in  ensuing  seasons  when  the 
infestation  is  equally  serious,  the  writer  recommends  spraying  again 
for  second  brood  codling  moth  from  the  third  week  in  July,  in  southern 
Illinois,  to  the  first  week  in  August,  in  northern  Illinois.  Finally, 
should  a third  brood  attack  the  very  late  varieties,  as  occurred  in  the 
southern  part  of  the  state  in  1913,  a final  supplementary  application 
must  be  made  as  soon  as  the  grower  is  convinced  that  larvae  are  again 
entering  the  apples.  This  application  will  be  from  the  first  week  in 
September,  in  the  extreme  south  of  the  state,  to  the  third  week,  in 
central  Illinois.  A third  brood  rarely,  if  ever,  occurs  in  northern 
Illinois.  Arsenate  of  lead  and  lime  in  the  proportions  above  recom- 
mended for  the  first  supplementary  spraying  should  be  used  for  these 
applications.  If  growers  are  obliged  to  spray  for  blotch  and  bitter 
rot,  arsenate  of  lead  should  be  added  to  the  fungicides  applied,  as  a 
precaution  against  late  brood  codling  moths. 

Trapping  the  Larvae 

As  a supplement  to  spraying,  attempts  should  be  made  to  trap 
and  destroy  the  larvae,  thus  reducing  the  number  of  adults,  and  by 
this  means,  of  course,  lessening  the  numbers  of  insects  in  future  broods. 
The  codling  moth  larva  or  apple  worm,  after  growing  to  full  size  in  the 
apple,  leaves  the  fruit  and  searches  for  a dark  protected  place  behind 
a rough  piece  of  bark,  or  elsewhere,  to  change  into  a pupa  or  chrysalis 
and  finally  become  a brown  winged  moth.  If  the  apple  has  fallen  to 
the  ground,  the  larva  generally  makes  its  way  to  the  trunk  of  the 
tree  and  crawls  up  to  a suitable  place.  Some  of  the  worms  may  also 
drop  from  the  trees  by  means  of  silken  threads.  If  the  larva  crawls 
out  of  the  fruit  while  the  apple  still  remains  on  the  tree,  it  then 
crawls  down  the  branches,  generally  to  the  trunk,  in  search  of  a 
similar  hiding  place.  By  furnishing  suitable  hiding  places  on  the 
trunk  just  above  the  ground  and  again  just  below  the  main  branches, 


4 


the  larvae  will  gather  there  in  large  numbers  to  make  their  transfor- 
mations, and  while  there  may  easily  be  destroyed. 

The  most  readily  available  materials  for  these  traps  are  bands 
made  of  thick  brown  wrapping  paper,  and  burlap.  The  paper  bands 
should  be  4 or  5 inches  wide,  with  three  or  four  folds.  They  are  most 
conveniently  cut  from  a roll  which  should  be  from  twenty-four  to 
thirty-six  inches  wide,  depending  on  the  circumference  of  the  tree 
trunks.  The  burlap  bands  should  be  three  folds  of  the  cloth  in  thick- 
ness, secured  by  wrapping  a single  band  three  times  around  the  tree 
or  by  folding  the  material  to  begin  with.  The  bands,  placed  as  already 
described,  are  fastened  to  the  tree  with  two  short  nails.  If  burlap  is 
used,  the  heads  of  the  nails  may  be  nipped  off,  or  short  finishing  nails 
used,  so  as  to  permit  the  easy  removal  and  replacing  of  the  bands  by 
the  examiner.  If  paper  is  used,  the  nail  heads  must  be  left  on  and  the 
nails  removed  with  a claw  hammer  each  time  the  bands  are  examined. 

To  secure  the  maximum  efficiency  from  the  traps,  the  rough  bark 
on  the  lower  branches  and  trunks  of  the  trees  must  be  scraped  off  to 
prevent  part  of  the  larvae  from  using  the  old  bark  scales  for  hiding 
places. 

The  bands  should  be  placed  on  the  trees  about  the  middle  of  June 
or  as  soon  afterwards  as  possible.  Every  ten  days  during  the 
remainder  of  the  season  they  must  be  inspected  and  the  trapped  larvae 
destroyed.  They  are  most  easily  killed  by  passing  the  bands  thru 
a clothes  wringer,  which  can  be  transported  thru  the  orchard  on  a 
wheelbarrow. 

. While  banding  fails  to  catch  all  the  larvae,  it  does  trap  enough 
to  m^ke.  it  a most  important  supplement  to  spraying,  and  in  this 
season,  when  every  effort  must  be  strained  to  save  the  crop  from  the 
late  worms,  growers  are  earnestly  urged  to  employ  trapping  as  a sup- 
plement to  their  sprays. 


Note. — Figures  i,  4,  5,  6,  and  7 from  photographs  by  W.  A.  Ruth. 
Figures  2 and  3 from  111.  Ex.  Sta.  Bui.  No.  114  by  W.  J.  Lloyd. 


5 


Fig.  2. — Entry  of  Codling  Moth  Larvae  thru  the  Side  of  the  Apple 


Fig.  3. — Work  of  Second  Brood  of  Codling  Moth.  Worm  Entering  Apple  on 
the  Left  Stopped  Near  Surface 


6 


Fig.  4. — Burlap  and  Paper  Bands 


Fig.  5. — Showing  Method  of  Folding  Paper  Bands 


7 


Fig.  6. — Placing  Trap  Band  on  Trunk  of  Apple  Tree 


Fig.  7. — Method  of  Destroying  Larvae  in  the  Bands 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 

URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  JUNE.  1914 
CIRCULAR  No.  172 

THE  BLIGHT  OF  APPLES,  PEARS,  AND  QUINCES 

By  B.  S.  Pickett 


Young  Fruits  Killed  by  Blight 


Introduction 


On  May  8,  1914,  the  Horticultural  Department  of  this  station  received 
the  following  telegram: 

“The  best  prospect  in  years  for  large  apple  crop  in  Union  county  has 
been  destroyed  in  last  forty-eight  hours  by  what  seems  blight.  Orchardists 
here  do  not  understand  it.  Would  like  department  to  send  man  at  once. 
We  think  it  would  serve  southern  Illinois  well  to  do  so. — (Signed)  W.  E. 
Harreld.” 

In  answer  to  this  telegram  the  Department  sent  Warren  A.  Ruth  to 
Union  county  to  make  a careful  investigation  of  the  situation  there.  This 
telegram  was  followed  by  others  from  southern  Illinois  and  by  numerous 
letters  from  widely  distributed  localities.  While  it  was  impossible  to  do 
anything  to  check  the  spread  of  pear  blight  during  this  season,  it  was 
nevertheless  thought  wise  to  reach  as  many  of  the  growers  personally  as 
possible;  consequently,  careful  inspections  were  made  in  a number  of  other 
counties  in  southern  Illinois,  especially  in  Clay  and  Richland  counties. 
Everywhere  the  disease  was  found  to  have  done  an  immense  amount  of 
damage.  Probably  never  before  in  the  history  of  the  state,  certainly  not 
since  the  ravages  of  bitter  rot  in  1902,  has  such  wholesale  damage  jeen 
done  to  the  apple  growing  industry.  So  important  has  the  situation  be- 
come that  this  department  has  held  a number  of  conferences  with  a view 
not  only  to  discussing  the  matter  somewhat  in  detail  and  to  making  prep- 
aration for  experimental  work  in  future  years,  but  also  for  the  purpose  of 
getting  together  the  latest  and  best  information  with  reference  to  pear 
blight.  The  following  circular,  therefore,  is  chiefly  a compilation  from  the 
publications  of  the  leading  authorities  on  the  subject,  but  written  from  the 
Illinois  standpoint.  The  writer  has  endeavored  to  avoid  technical  descrip- 
tions of  the  disease  and  to  present  the  subject  in  concise  form. 

J.  C.  Blair 

Head  of  the  Department  of  Horticulture 


THB  BLIGHT  OF  APPLES,  PEARS,  AND  QUINCES 

By  B.  S.  Pickett,  Assistant  Chief  in  Pomology 

Plight  is  one  of  the  most  common  and  serious  diseases  of  the 
apple,  pear,  and  quince.  Waite1  says : ‘‘There  is  probably  no  disease 

of  fruit  trees  so  thorolv  destructive  as  pear  blight,  which  attacks 
pears,  apples,  and  other  pomaceous  fruits.”  Whetzel  and  Stewart2 
write : “This  is  the  most  destructive  and  the  most  dreaded  disease  of 
fruit  trees,  particularly  of  the  pear.”  Blight  is  known  to  exist  only 
in  North  America,  but  it  is  distributed  over  every  part  of  this  con- 
tinent where  fruits  are  grown.  It  has  long  been  regarded  as  especially 
destructive  in  the  Mississippi  valley  states,  and  Illinois  fruit  growers 
have  suffered  huge  losses  from  time  to  time  as  a result  of  its  attacks. 
In  seasons  such  as  the  present  one  (1914),  the  disease  becomes 
a serious  menace  to  the  apple  and  pear  industries  of  the  state.  A very 
reliable  and  conservative  estimate  places  the  damage  in  one  county  at 
$500,000,  and  the  writer  estimates  the  damage  to  the  crop  over  the 
state  at  not  less  than  $1,500,000  for  the  season.  It  is  more  common 
and  its  ravages  are  more  serious  in  the  southern  part  of  Illinois  than 
in  the  northern  part,  but  it  occurs  in  all  sections  of  the  state.  The 
severity  of  the  infection  varies  with  the  season,  but  it  is  always  pres- 
ent in  greater  or  less  quantities,  and  it  rarely  happens  that  all  parts 
of  the  state  escape  its  ravages  during  any  single  season. 

Besides  affecting  apples,  pears,  and  quinces,  blight  also  affects 
hawthorn,  crab  apple,  service  berry,  mountain  ash,  and  occasionally 
plum  and  apricot.  The  disease  affects  all  parts  of  the  tree,  including 
the  blossoms,  twigs,  fruit,  branches,  trunks,  and  roots.  The  pear  and 
quince  suffer  more  severely  than  other  fruits,  and  the  growing  of  the 
more  susceptible  varieties  of  pears,  on  this  account,  has  been  aban- 
doned in  southern  and  central  Illinois. 

The  symptoms  of  blight  vary  somewhat  with  the  part  of  the  tree 
attacked.  In  its  more  conspicuous  forms  it  affects  the  blossoms  and 
twigs,  and  is  commonly  called  blossom  blight,  and  twig  blight,  depend- 
ing on  the  parts  injured.  When  it  attacks  the  blossoms,  the  flower 


iThe  Cause  and  Prevention  of  Pear  Blight,  Yearbook,  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  1895,  p.  295. 
2Fire  Blight  of  Pears,  Apples,  Quinces,  etc.,  Whetzel  and  Stewart,  Cornell  Univ. 
Bui.  272,  p.  37. 


4 


parts  and  the  stems  wither,  darken  in  color,  and  die,  in  from  six  to 
ten  days  after  blossoming  time.  Blossom  blight  frequently  works  back 
thru  the  spurs  to  the  branches,  where  it  occasionally  continues  to 
grow  to  an  indefinite  distance.  Twig  blight  affects  the  fresh  growing 
shoots,  destroying  the  tissues  of  the  stem  and  resulting  in  the  death 
of  the  leaves  and  twigs.  It  usually  accompanies  blossom  blight,  but  it 
may  also  occur  at  other  times  during  the  growing  season.  Affected 
leaves  first  wilt  and  then  darken  without  failing  off,  giving  to  the  tree 
the  scorched  look  from  which  the  disease  receives  the  common  name 
of  fire  blight. 

As  in  the  case  of  blossom  blight,  which  frequently  continues  its 
destructive  action  thru  the  spurs  and  into  the  branches,  so  too,  twig 
blight  may  continue  to  grow  backwards  along  the  branches  until  some 
unfavorable  condition  checks  its  progress.  The  progressive  growth 
of  the  disease  thru  the  branches  is  more  characteristic  of  pears  and 
quinces  than  of  apples,  the  disease  in  the  latter  more  commonly,  tho 
by  no  means  always,  stopping  at  the  end  of  the  first  season’s  growth. 

When  the  blight  attacks  the  larger  branches  or  the  trunks  of 
the  trees,  it  is  spoken  of  as  body  blight.  Body  blight  may  be  intro- 
duced by  growth  of  the  disease  thru  the  branches  or  water  sprouts, 
by  infections  introduced  thru  punctures  made  by  insects,  or  thru 
accidental  injuries  to  the  bark  of  the  trees.  Body  blight  is  one  of  the 
mediums  which  carry  the  disease  over  the  winter,  and  it  is  frequently 
destructive  to  the  life  of  the  tree. 

The  blight  of  apples  and  pears  is  caused  by  a bacillus  discovered 
by  Dr.  T.  J.  Burrill  of  the  University  of  Illinois  in  1879,  called  Bacillus 
amylovorus.1  This  organism  lives  over  the  winter  in  affected  portions 
of  the  bark  on  the  larger  branches  and  trunks  of  the  apple,  and  per- 
haps on  branches  of  all  sizes,  including  the  trunk  of  the  pear.  Under 
favorable  conditions  at  blossoming  time  a gummy  ooze,  composed 
largely  of  the  blight  bacillus,  is  exuded  from  the  diseased  areas  in 
small  milky  drops,  which  soon  darken  and  become  orange  or  brown  in 
color.  Insects  carry  the  infection  to  the  blossoms,  where  the  bacteria 
find  a suitable  cultural  medium  in  the  contents  of  the  nectar  glands. 
The  bacillus  multiplies  very  rapidly,  and  in  the  course  of  twenty-four 
hours  a single  infected  blossom  is  capable  of  becoming  the  source  of 
infection  for  many  thousand  other  blossoms.2  Within  the  cells  of 

lAnthrax  of  Fruit  Trees,  T.  J.  Burrill,  Trans.  Am.  Assoc,  for  Advancement  of 
Science,  1880;  Blight  of  Pear  and  Apple  Trees,  T.  J.  Burrill,  10th  Report  of  the  Illinois 
Industrial  University,  1880,  pp.  62-84. 

2Fungous  Diseases  of  Plants,  Duggar,  p.  125. 


5 


the  stem,  fruit,  or  bark  the  organism  destroys  the  cell  contents  and 
apparently  starves  the  parts  to  death.  The  rapidity  with  which  the 
bacteria  multiply  and  the  abundant  means  of  distributing  the  infec- 
tion thru  the  agency  of  insects  which  visit  the  blossoms,  are  sufficient 
to  account  for  the  great  destructiveness  of  the  disease  in  those  seasons 
when  conditions  are  favorable. 

The  bacteria  enter  the  twigs  thru  insect  punctures,  or  possibly, 
in  some  cases,  directly  thru  the  unprotected  growing  tips  of  the  shoots. 
Gradually  they  work  thru  the  tissues  to  a greater  or  less  distance  away 
from  the  ends  of  the  twigs.  From  nine  days  to  three  weeks  after  the 
infection  takes  place,  the  leaves  begin  to  wilt.  Presently  they  turn 
brown  on  the  apple,  or  black  on  the  pear,  giving  the  twigs  the  appear- 
ance of  having  been  scorched  by  fire.  Commonly  the  disease  extends 
only  as  far  as  the  new  growth  on  the  apple,  but  frequently  in  sus- 
ceptible varieties  of  the  pear,  and  occasionally  on  the  apple,  it  continues 
to  extend  backwards  along  some  of  the  branches  until,  in  the  course 
of  -some  months,  it  may  reach  the  body  limbs  or  even  the  trunks  of 
the  trees.  As  the  disease  extends  backward  from  the  point  of  infec- 
tion, the  bark  turns  brown  and  becomes  very  slightly  depressed,  both 
the  color  and  the  depression  gradually  blending  off  into  apparently 
healthy  bark.  In  many  cases,  however,  the  infection  extends  some 
distance  beyond  the  darkened  bark. 

When  the  bacteria  cease  their  activity  either  thru  death  or  thru 
conditions  which  check  their  multiplication,  a distinct  line  of  demarca- 
tion separates  the  healthy  from  the  diseased  tissue,  and,  in  a majority 
of  cases,  the  bacteria  in  the  affected  tissue  die.  When  the  bacteria 
die,  the  diseased  tissue  separates  from  the  healthy  tissue  by  a crack 
which  delineates  the  edge  of  a blight  canker.  In  some  cases,  how- 
ever, the  bacteria  do  not  all  die  but  continue  to  work  very  slowly  into 
the  surrounding  tissues,  prolonging  the  disease  for  several  months  or 
even  over  winter.  These  are  the  hold-over  cankers,  which  carry  the 
disease  from  one  season  to  the  next.  The  most  serious,  of  these 
hold-over  cankers  in  apple  trees  are  probably  the  large  ones  which 
are  found  on  the  larger  branches,  in  the  forks  of  the  branches,  and, 
in  certain  cases  of  “collar  rot,”  in  large  diseased  areas  on  the  trunks 
just  above  the  surface  of  the  ground.  In  pears,  hold-over  cankers 
have  been  found  plentifully  on  small  branches.1  Blight  cankers  may 
be  looked  for  on  the  main  branch  at  the  foot  of  any  diseased  twig 
which  has  been  killed  or  injured  by  the  disease.  While  one  cannot 


lHold-over  Blight  in  the  Pear,  Sackett.  Colorado  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  177,  p.  5. 


6 


be  certain  that  diseased  areas  in  the  crotches  of  the  trees,  whether 
on  the  main  trunk  or  further  out  on  the  branches,  are  caused  by  blight 
bacteria  without  making  a pathological  examination,  any  diseased 
condition  at  such  points  should  be  regarded  with  suspicion.  The  same 
holds  true  in  connection  with  the  diseased  areas  just  above  the  ground. 

Preventive  and  Remedial  Measures 

The  control  of  blight  has  long  been  regarded  as  dubious,  but 
various  investigators  of  the  disease  positively  declare  that  it  is  prac- 
ticable.1 

The  following  recommendations  are  offered : 

i.  The  infective  sources  which  carry  the  disease  over  winter 
should  be  removed.  These  are : 

(a)  Seriously  diseased  apple  trees , pear  trees,  quinces,  haw- 
thorn, service  berry,  and  crab  apples  zvithin  considerable  distances, 
probably  one-half  mile,  of  the  orchards  to  be  protected.  Neglected 
trees  of  all  these  kinds  are  an  especial  menace,  and  fruit  growers 
should  not  hesitate  to  remove  them  from  their  own  premises  and  urge 
their  removal  thruout  the  entire  neighborhood.  One  single  tree  badly 
affected  by  hold-over  blight  cankers  may  cause  untold  damage  in  sea- 
sons when  blossom  blight  is  prevalent. 

(b)  Blighted  tzvigs,  spurs,  and  branches.  In  pear  orchards  and 
in  young  apple  orchards  where  the  trees  are  not  too  large,  weekly 
inspections  should  be  made  from  blossoming  time  to  the  end  of  the 
season  and  every  case  of  spur  or  twig  blight  clipped  out  with  pole 
primers  or  hand  shears  as  soon  as  it  appears.  In  large  apple  orchards 
where  the  trees  are  of  considerable  size,  however,  the  task  of  pruning 
out  all  the  blighted  twigs  following  an  epidemic  is  so  staggering  that, 
even  tho  it  might  pay  in  the  long  run,  few  growers  would  undertake  it. 
Under  such  conditions  the  inspector  must  at  least  watch  for  and 
remove  all  shoots  or  branches  in  which  the  blight,  after  a period  of 
perhaps  ten  days  after  the  first  appearance  of  its  effects,  continues 
to  work  and  destroy  the  tissues.  In  ordinary  seasons  the  blighted 
twigs  could  be  removed  even  from  the  larger  orchards  at  a cost  well 
within  the  reach  of  the  orchardist.  The  wounds  made  in  removing 
the  diseased  parts  should  be  disinfected  with  corrosive  sublimate 
solution,  i to  1000,  applied  to  the  freshly  cut  surfaces  with  a sponge. 

lBlight  of  Pear  and  Apple  Trees,  Burrill,  10th  Rept.  111.  Industrial  Univ.,  1880,  pp. 
79-83;  The  Cause  and  Prevention  of  Pear  Blight,  Yearbook,  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  1895. 
pp.  278-280;  Fire  Blight  of  Pears,  Apples,  Quinces,  etc.,  Whetzel  and  Stewart,  Cornell 
Univ.  Bui.  272,  p.  46. 


7 


For  convenience  the  sponge  may  be  tied  to  the  pole  just  below  the 
pruning  shears,  so  that  the  disinfectant  can  be  brushed  over  the  sur- 
face of  the  wounds  on  the  higher  branches.  The  sponge  may  be 
dampened  from  time  to  time  with  some  of  the  solution  carried  in  a 
bottle  hung  on  the  operator’s  belt. 

(c)  Hold-over  cankers.  The  locations  of  these  diseased  areas 
in  the  bark  have  already  been  described.  To  find  them  the  inspector 
must,  from  time  to  time  during  the  summer,  examine  the  trunks  and 
larger  crotches  of  the  trees  for  collar  rot  or  other  diseases  of  the  bark. 
The  cankers  on  the  limbs  will  most  easily  be  located  by  watching  for 
diseased  twigs,  branches  with  small  or  yellow  leaves,  or  parts  of  the 
tree  which  show  signs  of  illness,  and  tracing  the  trouble  back  to  a 
canker,  if  this  be  present.  While  dormant,  the  higher  crotches  of  the 
trees  should  be  inspected,  and  every  suspicious  patch  of  bark  observed 
while  pruning  should  be  examined  for  the  disease.  The  diseased 
patches,  as  soon  as  located,  should  be  scraped  or  pared  back  to  live 
wood  and  the  wounds  disinfected  with  corrosive  sublimate  (bichloride 
of  mercury),  i to  1000.  Corrosive  sublimate  tablets  can  be  obtained 
at  any  drug  store,  and  the  solution  is  easily  prepared  by  following 
the  directions  for  dilution  given  on  the  bottle.  As  the  solution  is  very 
poisonous  it  must  never  be  left  standing  where  it  will  be  mistaken  for 
something  else,  or  where  animals  or  children  might  have  access  to  it. 
After  the  wound  has  been  disinfected  by  sponging  it  thoroly  with  the 
solution,  it  should  be  painted  with  an  antiseptic  tree  paint  to  keep  out 
moisture  and  spores  of  fungous  diseases.  The  paint  is  easily  pre- 
pared by  mixing  white  lead  and  linseed  oil  to  the  proper  consistency 
and  adding  two  tablespoons  of  crude  carbolic  acid  to  a pint  of  the 
paint. 

2.  Care  should  be  taken  to  avoid  bruising  or  injuring  the  bark 
of  the  trees,  as  infection  may  take  place  thru  such  wounds. 

3.  Water  sprouts  should  be  kept  closely  rubbed  off.  Blight 
grows  in  water  sprouts  with  great  rapidity  and  reaches  the  trunks  and 
body  limbs  of  the  trees  very  easily  by  this  means. 

4.  Sprays  have  generally  been  considered  of  dubious  benefit. 
Experimental  evidence  of  a direct  character  is,  however,  rather  want- 
ing. In  a series  of  spraying  experiments  in  the  charge  of  O.  S.  Wat- 
kins of  the  Department  of  Horticulture  of  the  University,  at  Neoga, 
Illinois,  during  the  present  season  (1914),  there  is  noticeably  more 
blight  in  unsprayed  plots  than  in  sprayed  plots.  There  is  also  more 
blight  in  the  part  of  the  orchard  managed  by  the  owner,  who  failed 


i 


to  spray  just  before  the  blossoms  opened,  than  in  the  part  managed 
by  the  Experiment  Station,  where  this  application  was  made.  Bor- 
deaux, lime  sulfur,  copper  ferrocyanide,  and  other  fungicides  were 
used  along  with  arsenate  of  lead,  but  comparisons  between  these  sprays 
are  not  available  at  the  time  of  writing.  Whether  the  control  thus 
exercised  was  due  to  the  destruction  of  infection-carrying  insects  or 
to  a fungicidal  action  of  the  sprays,  we  are  not  prepared  to  hazard 
an  opinion.  Moreover,  the  conditions  which  made  the  sprays  effective 
in  1914  may  not  be  the  same  in  other  seasons.  Finally,  it  is  to  be  noted 
that  in  the  sprayed  plots  blight  appeared  rather  freely. 

5.  Burning  the  blighted  parts  immediately  after  their  removal 
from  the  trees  is  recommended  as  a precaution.  The  bacteria  die  as 
soon  as  the  twigs  dry  out,  but  there  might  be  a possibility  of  carrying 
the  infection  from  the  pruned  twigs  or  canker  shavings  and  scrapings 
while  they  are  still  fresh. 

Effective  control  of  the  blight  of  apples  and  pears  in  any  section 
of  Illinois  is  dependent  on  the  united  efforts  of  the  fruit  growers  for 
its  extermination.  The  climatic  conditions  are  favorable  in  most  sea- 
sons for  more  or  less  of  the  disease.  The  infection  can  be  carried 
as  far  as  insects  visiting  the  blossoms  happen  to  fly.  Neighborhood 
action  is  necessary,  therefore,  if  the  largest  effects  are  to  be  obtained. 
In  some  localities  it  may  be  feasible  to  eliminate  entirely  what  are 
believed  to  be  the  principal  winter  carriers  of  the  disease,  the  pear 
trees,  or  to  inaugurate  a system  of  official  inspection  working  toward 
the  complete  clearing  up  of  the  hold-over  cankers  in  the  orchards  of 
any  given  county  or  locality. 


f 


Healthy  Spur  and  Blossoms  Blight-Injured  Spur  and  Blossoms 


10 


Blight  Cankers  on  Pear  Branches,  with  Blighted  Spur  on 
One  of  ti-ie  Branches 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  JUNE,  1914 


CIRCULAR  No.  173 


ONION  CULTURE 

John  W.  Lloyd 


Contents 


Introduction , . . 

Growing  Ripe  Onions  from  Seed 

Types  of  Onions 

The  Transplanting  Method 

Growing  Ripe  Onions  from  Sets  . 

Growing  Onion  Sets 

Dreen  Runch  Onions 


Page 

3 

4 
9 

10 

U 

13 


15 


ONION  CULTURE 

By  John  W.  Lloy7d,  Chief  in  Olericulture 
Introduction 

The  onion  is  one  of  the  most  important  vegetable  crops 
grown  in  the  United  States.  It  is  used  in  both  the  immature  and 
mature  stages,  and  can  be  found  in  all  large  markets  in  one  or 
both  forms  thruout  the  entire  year.  Its  adaptability  to  storage  in 
the  mature  state  enhances  its  value  as  a staple  product.  Its  rela- 
tively imperishable  nature  also  adapts  it  to  long  distance  ship- 
ment, rough  handling,  and  keeping  for  a considerable  time  even 
under  unfavorable  conditions.  It  is  thus  an  important  article  of 
food  in  mining,  construction,  and  lumber  camps,  and  other 
places  remote  from  sources  of  food  supply.  It  is  also  used  ex- 
tensively on  the  tables  of  all  classes  of  people,  and  its  use  is  rap- 
idly increasing.  The  former  aversion  to  onions  on  account  of 
their  offensive  odor  is  being  overcome  as  the  knowledge  of  their 
healthfulness  and  palatability  increases.  Whether  raw  or  cooked, 
alone  or  in  combination,  onions  are  appetizing  and  healthful. 
They  form  the  basis  of  many  important  dishes,  and  give  flavor 
and  character  to  a number  of  others  into  which  they  enter  only 
in  small  quantities. 

Onions  grow  best  in  relatively  cool  weather,  and  require  an 
abundance  of  moisture  during  their  early  stages  of  growth.  How- 
ever, they  will  stand  considerable  heat  after  they  have  made  a 
good  start,  and  ripen  better  if  the  weather  is  relatively  dry  at  the 
time  they  mature.  This  makes  them  an  important  crop  in  cen- 
tral and  northern  latitudes,  where  the  weather  of  spring  is  cool 
and  moist,  and  a dry  period  normally  occurs  in  August  or  in 
early  September.  However,  the  season  must  be  sufficiently  long 


3 


4 


for  the  onions  to  mature  before  the  autumn  rains  set  in,  or  they 
are  likely  never  to  ripen  properly.  Unless  properly  ripened, 
onions  will  not  keep.  For  northern  localities  it  is  sometimes 
necessary  to  use  only  the  earlier  maturing  varieties. 

The  above  statements  refer  to  the  growing  of  ripe  onions. 
Green  onions  reach  edible  size  in  a comparatively  short  time, 
and  can  be  grown  during  the  normally  cool  and  moist  weather 
of  early  spring  in  central  and  northern  latitudes,  or  of  fall  and 
winter  in  southern  localities.  As  a commercial  crop,  they  are 
of  minor  importance  as  compared  with  ripe  onions. 

Ripe  onions  may  be  produced  in  three  different  ways: 
(1)  by  sowing  the  seed  in  the  open  field  where  the  crop  is  to  ma- 
ture, (2)  by  transplanting  seedlings  that  have  been  started  under 
glass  or  in  a seed  bed,  and  (3)  by  planting  sets.  The  bulk  of  the 
onion  crop  of  the  United  States  is  produced  from  seed  sown  di- 
rectly in  the  field. 

Growing  Ripe  Onions  from  Seed 

Land  for  the  production  of  ripe  onions  should  be  exceedingly 
rich.  It  is  preferable  to  use  land  that  has  been  heavily  manured 
for  other  crops  two  or  three  years  preceding  its  use  for  onions, 
rather  than  to  start  with  a piece  of  ordinary  land  and  attempt  to 
make  it  rich  enough  for  onions  in  one  season.  Ordinary  land  is 
also  likely  to  contain  too  many  weed  seeds  to  make  onion  grow- 
ing profitable  until  after  two  or  three  years  of  preparatory  crop- 
ping with  other  plants  demanding  very  thoro  tillage.  During 
the  preparatory  cropping,  very  heavy  applications  of  manure 
should  be  made  every  year  and  the  land  kept  free  from  weeds. 
In  the  fall  preceding  the  spring  in  which  the  onions  are  to  be 
planted,  from  40  to  60  tons  of  manure  should  be  applied  to  each 
acre  of  ground,  and  the  land  deeply  plowed.  If  onions  are  grown 
on  the  same  land  in  succeeding  years,  as  is  often  the  case,  similar 
quantities  of  manure  should  be  applied  for  each  onion  crop. 
The  land  will  thus  be  continually  getting  in  better  condition  for 
the  production  of  onions  with  each  succeeding  crop,  unless  it 
becomes  infested  with  insects  or  infected  by  diseases.  Onions 
are  one  of  the  few  crops  that  give  better  results  if  grown  suc- 
cessively upon  the  same  land  than  if  new  ground  is  used  each 
year.  This  is  because  it  takes  a few  years  to  get  a piece  of  land 


in  ideal  condition  for  the  production  of  onions,  and  land  once  in 
that  condition  can  be  kept  so,  much  more  readily  than  a new 
piece  of  land  can  be  brought  up  to  the  same  condition.  The 
“condition”  referred  to  in  this  connection  involves  three  things: 
(1)  richness  in  available  plant  food,  (2)  friability,  due  to  the 
presence  of  large  quantities  of  humus  and  extremely  thoro  till- 
age, and  (3)  relative  freedom  from  weed  seeds.  These  three  fac- 
tors of  soil  condition  are  essential  to  profitable  onion  culture. 

In  order  that  onions  may  get  a good  start  before  hot  weather, 
it  is  essential  that  the  seed  be  planted  early.  This  is  one  reason 
that  the  land  should  be  plowed  in  the  fall.  At  the  very  earliest 
date  that  the  fall-plowed  land  can  be  worked  in  the  spring,  prep- 
arations for  planting  the  onions  should  begin.  Soil  that  is  suf- 
ficiently friable  for  the  production  of  onions  usually  will  not 
need  replowing  in  the  spring,  so  that  the  first  operation  in  the 
spring  preparatory  to  planting  will  be  a thoro  disking.  The  disk 
should  be  followed  by  a spike-tooth  harrow.  Many  successful 
onion  growers  complete  the  preparation  of  the  seed  bed  by  the 
use  of  a Meeker  harrow,  while  others  use  a planker.  These  vari- 
ous tools  should  be  used  repeatedly,  if  necessary,  so  that  an  ex- 
ceedingly fine  seed  bed  may  be  prepared.  Land  for  only  one 
day’s  planting  should  be  prepared  at  a time,  and  the  seed  drill 
should  follow  immediately  after  the  last  preparation  tool.  This 
prevents  the  top  soil  from  drying  out  before  the  seed  is  planted, 
and  insures  the  presence  of  moist  soil  in  direct  contact  with  the 
seed. 

Seed  is  usually  sown  by  means  of  a garden  seed  drill  in  rows 
12  inches  apart;  this  is  the  standard  distance,  whether  a few 
rows  or  several  acres  are  grown.  If  the  plants  are  to  be  thinned, 
4 to  5 pounds  of  seed  are  sown  to  the  acre.  If  thinning  is  not  to 
be  practiced,  a smaller  quantity  of  carefully  tested  seed  is  prefer- 
able. Some  of  the  most  successful  growers  sow  from  3%  to  31/4 
pounds  per  acre,  and  do  not  thin.  This  method  results  in  smaller 
and  less  uniform  bulbs,  but  it  is  a great  saving  in  labor. 

As  soon  as  the  plants  are  up,  tillage  with  wheel  hoes  should 
begin,  and  should  be  repeated  at  frequent  intervals  until  the 
plants  are  so  large  that  it  can  no  longer  be  done.  Care  should  be 
taken  to  cultivate  the  onions  as  soon  as  the  ground  is  sufficiently 
dry  after  each  rain,  and  at  other  times  if  necessary.  On  the  aver- 


d 

age,  they  should  he  cultivated  at  least  once  in  ten  days  for  a 
period  of  about  three  months.  Early  in  the  season  the  double- 
wheel hoe  is  usually  employed.  This  cultivates  both  sides  of 
one  row  at  a time.  The  blades  should  be  set  to  cut  as  close  as 
possible  to  the  row,  and  thus  kill  all  incipient  weeds  except  those 
directly  between  the  plants  in  the  row.  Later,  a single-wheel  hoe, 
that  goes  between  the  rows,  may  be  more  advantageously  em- 
ployed. One  with  a large  wheel  is  preferable  to  the  small- 
wheeled type  for  late  tillage,  since  there  is  less  danger  of  injur- 
ing the  plants  with  the  axle  and  frame-work.  Under  usual  con- 
ditions a man  should  be  able  to  cultivate  an  acre  of  onions  a day. 

Altho  every  precaution  may  have  been  taken  to  keep  weed 
seeds  out  of  the  onion  land  and  to  kill  young  weeds  by  tillage  be- 
fore they  are  fairly  started,  some  hand  weeding  will  be  necessary 
to  eliminate  the  weeds  that  are  directly  in  the  rows.  These 
should  be  pulled  before  they  become  large,  so  that  they  will  not 
rob  the  onions  of  moisture,  plant  food,  and  sunlight.  Also,  if  the 
weeds  are  numerous  and  are  allowed  to  become  large,  their  ulti- 
mate removal  is  likely  to  disturb  the  roots  of  the  onions,  and 
cause  them  to  ripen  prematurely  without  developing  to  normal 
size.  On  the  whole,  the  weeding  of  onions  is  exceedingly  im- 
portant, and  must  be  attended  to  promptly  or  disastrous  results 
are  likely  to  follow.  Usually  the  onions  will  need  weeding  about 
three  times,  but  if  more  frequent  weeding  is  needed  to  keep  the 
plantation  clean,  it  should  by  all  means  be  given. 

If  the  onions  are  to  be  thinned,  this  may  be  done  at  the  time 
of  the  first  or  second  weeding.  It  should  preferably  be  done  be- 
fore the  onions  are  as  large  as  lead  pencils,  for  if  the  plants  are 
very  thick,  they  soon  begin  to  interfere  with  one  another,  and 
the  surplus  plants  have  the  same  effect  as  weeds  upon  those  that 
are  to  remain.  The  thinning  should  be  done  when  the  soil  is 
moist,  care  being  taken  to  disturb  as  little  as  possible  the  roots  of 
the  plants  that  are  to  make  the  crop.  Care  should  also  be  taken 
to  leave  the  most  vigorous  plants.  If  large,  uniform  bulbs  are 
wanted,  the  plants  should  stand  at  least  three  inches  apart  in  the 
row  after  thinning. 

When  onions  ripen  properly,  the  necks  shrivel  first  and  the 
tops  fall  over  while  they  are  yet  green.  Gradual  drying  of  the 
leaves  from  the  tips  downward  while  the  necks  remain  rigid  and 


erect  indicates  abnormal  ripening,  and  usually  poor  keeping 
quality.  Therefore,  such  onions  should  be  used  soon  after  the 
harvest  and  no  attempt  made  to  store  them  for  winter.  Follow- 
ing the  shriveling  of  the  necks  in  normal  ripening,  the  leaves 
gradually  turn  yellow,  and  finally  the  tops  become  dry  and  brown 
if  the  onions  are  not  pulled  before  they  reach  that  stage.  How- 
ever, it  is  usually  best  to  begin  the  harvest  as  soon  as  the  tops 
have  fallen  over  and  turned  yellow.  This  insures  getting  the 
onions  harvested  while  they  are  in  good  condition,  and  avoids 
the  risk  of  their  starting  a second  growth  in  case  of  heavy  rains 
following  their  ripening.  If  onions  start  into  a second  growth 
after  once  ripening,  their  keeping  quality  is  forever  ruined,  and 
they  are  fit  only  for  immediate  use. 

If  the  soil  is  dry  and  hard  when  the  onions  are  harvested,  it 
is  sometimes  an  advantage  to  loosen  the  bulbs  by  running  along 
the  row  with  an  “onion  harvester”  attachment  on  a wheel  hoe. 
This  is  a U-shaped  piece  of  steel  that  passes  under  the  bulbs  and 
loosens  the  soil  about  them  so  that  they  can  be  much  more  easily 
pulled.  If  the  soil  is  loose  at  harvest  time,  the  use  of  this  machine 
is  unnecessary;  the  bulbs  are  simply  grasped  by  the  top  and 
pulled  out,  or  any  deep-seated  or  tenacious  specimens  may  be 
caught  by  the  edge  of  the  bulb  itself  and  pulled  sideways. 

The  old  method  of  handling  the  onions  at  harvest  time  was 
to  place  them  in  windrows  in  the  field  as  they  were  pulled  (four 
rows  of  onions  usually  making  one  windrow)  and  allow  them 
to  cure  in  the  sun  for  one  or  two  weeks.  In  case  of  rain  while 
curing,  the  onions  were  occasionally  turned  with  a wooden  rake 
to  insure  their  drying  out  on  all  sides  and  to  prevent  their  taking 
root  in  the  moist  soil.  This  method  of  handling  results  in  more 
or  less  discoloration  of  the  bulbs  in  case  of  rain,  and  even  in  con- 
siderable loss  due  to  rotting  and  sprouting  if  the  rains  are  abund- 
ant. In  the  absence  of  rain,  there  is  sometimes  serious  loss  due 
to  sun-scald  of  the  curing  bulbs  in  excessively  hot  weather. 
White  onions  are  especially  difficult  to  cure  in  the  field ; for  this 
reason  their  curing  under  cover  has  been  often  advocated  and 
sometimes  employed,  even  when  other  sorts  were  cured  in  the 
field. 

In  the  old  method,  topping  was  usually  deferred  until  after 
the  curing  was  completed.  When  the  onions  were  taken  up  from 


the  windrows,  or  sometimes  later,  the  tops  were  pulled  oil*  by  hand 
©r  cut  off  with  shears  or  a knife.  The  top  was  supposed  to  be 
severed  at  a point  about  three-fourths  of  an  inch  from  the  bulb, 
to  avoid  injury  to  the  latter.  Machines  have  also  been  invented 
for  removing  the  tops. 

The  modern  method  of  harvesting  onions  now  employed  by 
practically  all  commercial  growers  in  the  vicinity  of  Chicago, 
where  onion  growing  is  an  important  industry,  dispenses  with 
field  curing  for  all  varieties,  and  completes  the  pulling  and  top- 
ping at  one  operation.  The  onions  remain  bright  in  color,  there 
is  no  loss  due  to  injury  by  excessive  heat  or  moisture,  and  no  ex- 
pense for  repeated  handling.  The  onions  are  pulled  at  the  stage 
already  indicated — before  the  tops  are  dry.  When  a handful  of 
onions  is  pulled,  the  tops  are  grasped  in  the  other  hand  and 
twisted  off.  The  onions  are  dropped  into  a crate,  or  into  a bas- 
ket to  be  emptied  into  a crate.  The  crates  in  common  use  about 
Chicago  are  really  trays.  They  are  4 feet  long,  3 feet  wide,  and 
4 inches  deep.  The  bottoms  are  made  of  lath  with  half-inch 
cracks  between  for  ventilation;  the  ends  are  of  five-inch  boards, 
and  the  sides  of  four-inch  strips.  The  crates  are  filled  barely 
level  with  the  tops  of  the  sides,  so  that  when  they  are  stacked  one 
above  another  there  is  at  least  an  inch  of  air  space  between  the 
onions  in  one  crate  and  the  bottom  of  the  crate  above.  This  pro- 
vides for  a free  circulation  of  air,  thus  aiding  greatly  in  the  cur- 
ing of  the  onions.  Within  a few  hours  after  the  crates  are  filled 
in  the  field,  they  are  hauled  to  the  curing  shed.  This  is  simply 
an  open  shed  with  the  gables  boarded  down  only  as  far  as  the 
eaves.  Here  the  crates  of  onions  are  stacked  in  tiers  nearly  to 
the  top  of  the  shed.  A space  13  inches  wide  is  left  between  every 
two  tiers.  This  provides  for  ventilation  between  the  tiers,  and 
also  allows  space  for  temporary  staging  of  twelve-inch  boards, 
which  enables  the  workmen  to  stack  the  crates  to  any  desired 
height.  The  onions  may  remain  in  the  curing  shed  until  there 
is  danger  of  freezing.  Then  they  must  be  either  marketed  or 
placed  in  winter  storage. 

In  the  absence  of  a curing  shed  and  onion  crates,  a consid- 
erable quantity  of  onions  could  be  cured  in  a corn  crib,  if  one 
were  available.  The  onions  should  be  spread  over  the  floor  of 
the  crib  in  a layer  not  over  three  or  four  inches  deep.  If  there  are 


9 


more  onions  than  enough  to  cover  the  tloor,  false  floors  about 
one  foot  apart  could  be  put  in,  and  thus  the  capacity  of  the  crib 
greatly  increased.  On  a small  scale,  onions  may  be  spread  out  in 
a thin  layer  in  almost  any  dry  place  where  the  air  will  circulate 
freely  thru  them.  Unless  thoroly  cured,  onions  will  not  keep. 

Types  op  Onions 

There  are  two  general  types  of  onions  grown  in  America  for 
use  in  the  ripe  state.  They  are  usually  spoken  of  as  the  “Ameri- 
can,” and  “foreign”  or  “European,”  types.  As  a class,  the  Ameri- 
can onions  produce  bulbs  of  smaller  size,  denser  texture,  sharper 
flavor,  and  better  keeping  quality.  They  also  ripen  earlier  and 
are  much  surer  to  mature  properly  in  the  North.  Three  distinct 
colors  of  American  onions  are  recognized  in  the  markets:  red, 
yellow,  and  white.  Each  of  the  large  markets  has  its  preferences, 
but  in  general,  white  onions  are  in  greater  demand  in  the  East, 
yellow  in  the  Central  West,  and  red  in  some  parts  of  the  North. 
There  are  other  intermediate  colors,  but  these  three  are  the  stand- 
ards in  the  markets.  Onions  vary  in  shape  from  flat  to  globular. 
The  globe-shaped  sorts  are  usually  preferred  on  the  market,  and 
also  are  likely  to  produce  greater  yields,  for  their  greater  depth 
enables  them  to  attain  larger  size  without  crowding. 

There  are  several  types  of  the  foreign  onions.  The  type 
most  likely  to  succeed  in  open  ground  culture  in  the  North  is  best 
represented  by  the  Prize  Taker  variety.  American  grown  seed  of 
this  foreign  sort  produces  bulbs  that  mature  almost,  if  not  quite, 
as  early  as  the  leading  American  sorts.  It  is  larger  in  size  and 
milder  in  flavor  than  most  American  onions,  and  keeps  better 
than  most  foreign  sorts.  The  Gigantic  Gibraltar  is  also  a foreign 
variety  that  promises  to  be  of  value  in  the  North.  Both  these 
varieties  are  grown  to  some  extent  as  winter  crops  in  the  Soutr 
by  using  the  transplanting  method. 

Bermuda  onions  constitute  another  foreign  type.  They  are 
the  mildest-flavored,  most  tender-fleshed,  and  poorest-keeping 
onions  in  the  entire  list.  In  this  country  they  are  grown  almost 
exclusively  in  restricted  areas  in  the  South,  principally  in  Texas, 
where  the  soil  and  climate  seem  especially  adapted  to  their  cul- 
ture. They  are  grown  under  irrigation,  as  a winter  crop  to  be 
harvested  early  in  spring,  and  are  always  transplanted.  Seed  is 


lu 


imported  directly  from  Teneriffe,  the  largest  of  the  Canary 
Islands,  located  in  the  Atlantic  Ocean  off  the  west  coast  of  Africa 

The  Transplanting.  Method 

The  transplanting  method  of  growing  onions,  also  called 
the  “new  onion  culture,”  involves  (1)  sowing  the  seed  in  an  es- 
pecially prepared  seed  bed,  which  in  the  South  may  be  in  the 
open,  but  in  the  North  is  either  in  a hotbed  or  a greenhouse,  and 
(2)  transplanting  the  seedlings  to  the  field  where  they  are  to 
complete  their  growlh,  when  they  are  from  fg  to  % inch  in 
diameter.  This  method  is  considered  especially  adapted  to  grow- 
ing the  large  and  foreign  types  of  onions,  and,  as  already  noted, 
is  used  in  the  production  of  Texas  Bermudas.  It  is  also  some- 
times used  on  a limited  scale  by  market  gardeners  in  the  North 
for  the  production  of  the  Prize  Taker  and  other  large  onions. 
The  chief  advantages  claimed  for  this  method  of  growing  onions 
are  earlier  maturity  and  larger  size  of  bulbs,  greater  uniformity 
in  stand  and  in  size  of  specimens,  larger  yields,  higher  prices, 
and  saving  in  the  cost  of  weeding.  The  chief  disadvantages  are 
that  the  expected  advantages  do  not  always  materialize,  that  it 
takes  considerable  time,  trouble,  and  equipment  to  grow  the 
plants,  and  that  the  transplanting  is  an  enormous  task.  If  the 
plants  are  placed  3 inches  apart  in  the  row>  it  takes  nearly  175,000 
to  set  an  acre.  Altho  the  individual  plants  can  be  set  quite  rap- 
idly and  there  is  no  particular  difficulty  in  making  them  live,  the 
setting  of  even  one  acre  involves  a very  large  amount  of  tedious 
labor.  No  one  should  ever  undertake  to  grow  a large  area  of 
transplanted  onions  until  after  giving  the  method  a thoro  trial 
on  a conservative  scale. 

One  difficulty  likely  to  be  encountered  in  trying  to  grow 
onions  by  the  transplanting  method  is  that  the  plants  often  fail 
to  reach  transplanting  size  at  the  time  they  should  be  trans- 
planted. To  get  the  full  benefit  of  this  method  in  earliness,  it  is 
necessary  to  set  out  the  plants  very  soon  after  it  would  be  possible 
to  plant  seeds  in  the  open.  Altho  it  is  sometimes  claimed  that 
plants  can  be  grown  to  transplanting  size  in  six  weeks,  it  is  more 
likely  to  take  double  that  time  during  the  short,  dark  days  of 
February  and  March.  In  localities  where  outdoor  gardening 
usually  begins  about  April  1,  onions  should  be  transplanted  not 


11 


later  than  April  15.  and  the  seeds  for  growing  these  plants  should 
be  sown  in  a greenhouse  or  fire  hotbed  not  later  than  January  15. 
Otherwise  the  size  of  the  plants  is  likely  to  be  disappointing.  The 
seeds  should  be  sown  in  rows  3 to  4 inches  apart  in  the  hotbed  or 
on  the  greenhouse  bench.  The  soil  of  the  seed  bed  should  be  thor- 
oly  manured  and  well  prepared.  The  watering  should  be  very 
carefully  done  in  the  dark  winter  weather.  A fairly  low  temper- 
ature should  be  maintained,  and  plenty  of  ventilation  given; 
otherwise  the  seedlings  are  likely  to  damp-off. 

When  the  time  for  transplanting  arrives,  the  field  should  be 
prepared  the  same  as  for  sowing  onion  seed.  Rows  should  then 
be  marked  out  one  foot  apart  and  the  seedlings  set  in  the  freshly 
worked  soil.  Usually  both  the  roots  and  the  tops  of  the  plants 
are  trimmed  to  a considerable  extent.  A whole  bunch  of  plants 
is  trimmed  at  two  strokes  of  the  knife,  so  that  very  little  time  is 
required  for  this  operation.  The  reason  for  trimming  the  roots 
is  to  facilitate  planting  and  to  avoid  having  any  long  roots  curl 
upward.  The  tops  are  trimmed  to  reduce  transpiration  and  make 
the  growth  of  the  plant  more  certain.  The  transplanting  is  usu- 
ally done  with  dibbers,  tho  in  loose  soil  the  workmen’s  fingers 
are  sometimes  substituted  for  the  dibbers. 

After  transplanting,  the  crop  is  immediately  tilled,  and  there- 
after the  treatment  is  essentially  the  same  as  for  a crop  grown 
from  seed  sown  directly  in  the  field,  except  that  no  thinning  is 
ever  required  and  the  necessity  of  early  weeding  is  eliminated. 
The  success  of  this  method  depends  primarily  upon  good  plants 
and  extra  early  planting.  In  the  hands  of  beginners,  this  method 
of  onion  culture  is  likely  to  be  a failure. 

Growing  Ripe  Onions  from  Sets 

The  surest  way  for  a beginner  to  grow  a good  crop  of  ripe 
onions  is  to  plant  sets.  These  are  miniature  onions  grown  from 
seed  the  preceding  year.  Their  method  of  production  will  be  de- 
scribed later.  They  can  be  procured  from  almost  any  seedsman, 
and  are  technically  known  as  “bottom  sets.”  These  are  offered 
in  the  three  colors,  red,  yellow,  and  white,  but  usually  no  variety 
names  are  mentioned.  If  a person  wishes  to  grow  onions  of  a 
given  variety  from  sets,  he  can  purchase  seed  and  grow  the  sets 


12 

uae  year,  and  then  store  them  over  winter  for  the  next  spring’s 
planting. 

The  essential  factors  in  growing  a large  crop  of  ripe  onions 
from  sets  are  practically  the  same  as  for  growing  a large  crop  of 
onions  by  either  of  the  other  methods;  viz.,  very  rich  soil,  ex- 
tremely early  planting,  thoro  tillage,  plenty  of  moisture.  The 
distinct  advantages  of  using  sets  as  compared  with  the  trans- 
planting method  are  that  the  sets  can  safely  be  planted  consider- 
ably earlier;  that  it  is  never  necessary  to  delay  planting  while 
waiting  for  the  plants  to  attain  the  proper  size;  that  the  planting 
can  be  done  much  more  rapidly;  that  the  expense  and  trouble  of 
growing  the  seedlings  are  obviated;  and  that  the  bulbs  are  surer 
to  attain  large  size.  As  compared  with  growing  onions  from  seed 
sown  directly  in  the  field,  the  set  method  is  more  expensive  on  ac- 
count of  the  high  cost  of  sets  and  the  labor  of  planting,  but  is 
much  surer  to  produce  a profitable  crop,  especially  under  un- 
favorable weather  conditions.  The  sets  may  sometimes  be 
planted  even  earlier  than  it  is  safe  to  plant  onion  seeds.  The 
stored-up  food  material  in  the  sets  gives  the  plants  a strong 
start,  and  they  are  able  to  make  a much  larger  proportion  of 
their  growth  than  plants  started  from  seed,  during  the  period  in 
which  the  weather  is  certain  to  be  cool  and  the  soil  moist.  This 
makes  the  onions  from  sets  a much  surer  crop  than  onions  from 
seed.  The  bulbs  are  usually  larger  and  the  crop  matures  nearly 
a month  earlier  than  when  grown  directly  from  seed. 

When  large  ripe  onions  of  the  preceding  year’s  growth  are 
planted  out  in  the  spring,  they  send  up  seed  stalks  and  the  bulbs 
become  inedible.  If  large,  over-grown  sets  are  planted,  many  of 
them  behave  like  large  onions  and  send  up  seed  stalks.  The 
bulbs  produced  by  these  sets  that  run  to  seed  are  worthless  as 
ripe  onions.  They  are  tough,  exceedingly  strong,  and  will  not 
keep.  Small  sets,  on  the  other  hand,  do  not  form  seed  stalks,  but 
produce  normal,  well-matured  bulbs  that  cannot  be  distinguished 
from  those  grown  directly  from  seed.  Very  small  sets  do  not 
make  as  vigorous  a start  as  larger  ones.  It  is  therefore  advisable 
to  plant  as  large  sets  as  can  be  depended  upon  not  to  run  to  seed. 
Experience  has  shown  that  sets  % to  % inch  in  diameter  are  of 
satisfactory  size  for  use  in  the  production  of  ripe  onions.  This 
size  is  secured  by  screening  the  sets  first  thru  a three-quarters 


13 


inch  sieve,  then  passing  them  over  a half-inch  screen.  Only  a 
small  percentage  of  sets  of  this  size  will  send  up  seed  stalks,  and 
they  are  large  enough  to  make  a quick  start  and  produce  large 
bulbs  before  the  weather  is  very  hot. 

For  growing  a crop  of  ripe  onions  from  sets,  the  land  should 
be  prepared  the  same  as  for  sowing  onion  seed,  then  marked  out 
in  rows  12  inches  apart,  and  the  sets  planted  by  hand.  The  only 
precaution  necessary  in  planting  sets  is  to  place  them  right  side 
up  and  push  them  far  enough  into  the  ground  so  that  the  base 
from  which  the  roots  are  to  start  will  be  in  close  contact  with 
moist  soil.  For  the  production  of  large  onions  the  sets  are 
planted  about  3 inches  apart  in  the  row.  After  the  sets  are 
placed,  soil  is  drawn  lightly  against  them  with  a rake. 

The  tillage  and  general  care  of  a crop  of  onions  grown  from 
sets  are  essentially  the  same  as  for  a crop  grown  from  seed,  ex- 
cept that  comparatively  little  weeding  is  required.  The  crop  may 
be  harvested  and  cured  in  the  same  way,  but  usually  should  be 
sold  soon  after  the  harvest,  before  onions  grown  from  seed  are 
available,  for  prices  are  likely  to  be  good  at  that  time,  and  the 
onions  grown  from  sets  are  not  considered  as  good  keepers  for 
winter  use  as  those  grown  directly  from  seed. 

Growing  Onion  Sets 

When  an  onion  seed  is  planted,  the  normal  thing  for  it  to  do 
is  to  produce  a bulb.  The  size  of  the  bulb  produced  will  depend 
upon  circumstances.  If  the  plant  has  undisputed  access  to  an 
abundance  of  food,  moisture,  and  sunlight,  and  the  temperature 
is  congenial,  the  bulb  is  likely  to  attain  normal  size  for  the  va- 
riety— perhaps  two,  three,  or  even  four  inches  in  diameter.  If 
the  soil  is  poor  or  the  season  dry,  or  if  the  plants  are  crowded, 
the  bulbs  will  be  smaller;  and  the  more  pronounced  any  or  all  of 
these  unfavorable  conditions,  the  more  strikingly  small  will  be 
the  bulbs.  Onion  sets  are  merely  miniature  onions  that  have  re- 
mained small  because  of  the  conditions  under  which  they  were 
grown. 

In  growing  onion  sets  it  was  formerly  the  practice  to  sow 
the  seed  late  in  the  season  on  poor  soil.  About  thirty  pounds  of 
seed  were  used  to  the  acre.  The  lack  of  plant  food  and  moisture, 
and  the  hot  weather  during  which  the  plants  had  to  make  their 


14 


principal  growth,  combined  with  the  fairly  thick  seeding,  were 
depended  upon  to  keep  the  bulbs  small.  The  practice  now  among 
many  commercial  growers  of  onion  sets  is  to  sow  the  seeds  on 
rich  soil  at  the  usual  time  for  sowing  onion  seed,  and  to  depend 
primarily  upon  the  thickness  of  seeding  to  keep  the  bulbs  from 
growing  too  large.  From  80  to  100  pounds  of  seed  are  used  per 
acre.  This  is  at  the  rate  of  about  200  seeds  per  foot  of  drill.  Un- 
der these  conditions  it  is  impossible  for  the  bulbs  to  become  too 
large  for  sets  except  in  seasons  particularly  favorable  to  their 
growth.  Then  the  largest  bulbs  can  be  screened  out  and  used 
for  pickling,  in  the  case  of  white  and  even  yellow  varieties. 

In  sowing  seeds  for  onion  sets,  the  rows  are  usually  made  12 
inches  apart  and  the  seed  is  sown  with  a regular  drill  the  same  as 
for  large  onions.  Sometimes  a special  attachment  is  used  to 
spread  the  seed  out  in  a wide  row,  so  that  the  individual  seedlings 
will  have  a little  more  space  at  the  start*. 

Onion  sets  are  cultivated  with  wheel  hoes  the  same  as  large 
onions,  and  require  as  careful  weeding.  If  sown  at  the  same 
time  as  other  onions,  they  ripen  earlier,  and  can  thus  be  har- 
vested and  out  of  the  way  before  the  large  onions  are  ready  to 
harvest. 

Under  modern  methods  of  handling  onion  sets,  they  are 
harvested  as  soon  as  the  necks  begin  to  ldse  their  sap  and  while 
the  tops  are  still  green  and  erect.  If  the  soil  is  compact,  an  onion 
harvester  may  be  run  under  the  rows,  or  each  workman  may  be 
furnished  an  iron  hook  with  which  to  loosen  the  soil  on  each 
sicte  of  the  row.  The  sets  are  pulled  by  the  handful,  the  tops  im- 
mediately twisted  off,  and  the  bulbs  dropped  into  a half-bushel 
basket  or  measure.  When  filled,  the  measures  are  emptied  into 
crates  similar  to  those  used  in  curing  large  onions,  except  that 
the  slats  forming  the  bottom  are  closer  together.  The  crates  of 
onion  sets  are  left  in  the  field  exposed  to  the  sun  for  a few  hours; 
then  they  are  hauled  to  a curing  shed,  or  more  often  stacked  up 
in  tiers  in  the  field,  each  tier  being  covered  with  a temporary 
roof  of  boards.  Here  the  sets  are  allowed  to  cure  until  time  to  put 
them  into  winter  storage.  If  the  soil  contains  considerable  mois- 
ture at  the  time  the  sets  are  pulled,  they  are  sometimes  run  over 
a screen  before  being  placed  in  the  crates,  and  the  surplus  dirt 
thus  shaken  off. 


15 


The  growing  of  onion  sets  is  an  important  industry,  and  is 
especially  well  developed  in  the  vicinity  of  Chicago,  Illinois, 
and  Louisville,  Kentucky.  From  these  points  onion  sets  are 
shipped  by  the  carload  to  all  parts  of  the  country.  Before  being 
shipped  out,  the  sets  are  cleaned  by  being  run  thru  a machine 
similar  to  a fanning  mill. 

Green  Bunch  Onions 

While  ripe  onions  constitute  the  more  important  crop,  green 
onions  are  included  in  the  majority  of  home  gardens,  and  are 
also  quite  extensively  produced  by  market  gardeners.  They  are 
called  “bunch  onions”  because  they  are  tied  in  bunches  when 
placed  on  the  market.  The  simplest  way  to  grow  green  onions, 
and  the  method  employed  by  most  home  gardeners,  is  to  plant 
ordinary  onion  sets  early  in  the  spring  and  pull  the  green 
onions  when  they  have  attained  the  desired  size.  The  larger  the 
sets,  the  quicker  they  will  produce  green  onions  of  edible  size; 
however,  unless  green  onions  grown  from  large  sets  are  pulled 
promptly  they  usually  start  to  send  up  seed  stalks,  and  soon  be- 
come strong  and  tough.  Large  sets  will  produce  green  onions 
ready  for  eating  in  about  four  weeks  from  the  time  of  planting; 
small  sets  require  from  six  to  eight  weeks. 

The  earliest  green  onions  in  spring  are  obtained  by  the  fall 
planting  of  multiplier,  perennial,  or  potato  onions.  In  all  cases, 
small  bulbs  are  planted.  These  produce  green  onions  early  in 
the  spring,  and  if  allowed  to  continue  growth,  the  multiplier  and 
potato  onions  will  develop  large  ripe  bulbs.  If  these  large  bulbs 
are  planted,  they  break  up  into  clusters  of  small  bulbs,  which  in 
turn  may  be  planted  for  the  production  of  green  onions  or  large 
bulbs.  In  the  case  of  the  perennial  or  “tree”  onions,  as  they  are 
sometimes  called,  a cluster  of  little  bulbs  is  produced  at  the  top 
of  the  stalk,  where  seed  is  produced  in  an  ordinary  onion.  The 
little  bulbs  are  known  as  top  sets.  The  bottom  also  divides  as  in 
the  case  of  the  multiplier  and  potato  onions,  but  no  large  bulbs 
are  ever  produced.  Both  the  top  sets  and  the  divided  bottoms 
may  be  planted  for  the  production  of  green  onions.  The  divided 
bottoms  produce  larger  and  earlier  green  onions  than  the  top  sets. 

In  central  latitudes,  the  perennial  or  tree  onions  should  be 
planted  about  September  1.  Furrows  about  4 inches  deep  should 


16 


be  made  in  rich,  thoroly  prepared  soil,  and  the  bulbs  planted  in 
the  bottom  of  the  furrows,  which  should  then  be  filled  with  loose 
soil  or  very  fine  compost.  If  compost  is  not  used  at  the  time  of 
planting,  it  is  a common  practice  to  mulch  the  bed  with  this  ma- 
terial late  in  the  fall.  In  either  case  only  sufficient  tillage  is  given 
to  keep  down  weeds.  The  onions  grow  nearly  to  edible  size  in 
the  fall,  and  the  deep  planting  insures  long  white  “stems.”  As 
soon  as  the  frost  leaves  the  ground  in  spring  and  the  tops  of  the 
onions  start  to  grow,  those  produced  from  the  divided  bottoms 
will  be  ready  to  use,  and  those  from  the  top  sets  will  follow 
shortly  after.  Any  of  the  onions  not  used  while  green  may  be 
allowed  to  remain  for  the  production  of  top  sets  and  divided  bot- 
toms for  planting  the  next  fall.  They  usually  mature  by  the 
first  of  August  and  should  be  cured  before  being  planted. 

These  perennial  or  tree  onions,  also  the  multiplier  and  potato 
onions,  may  be  planted  later  in  the  fall  than  September  1,  if  de- 
sired, but  in  that  case  they  produce  a later  crop,  since  their  prin- 
cipal growth  is  made  in  the  spring  instead  of  the  fall.  The 
method  of  growing  green  onions  from  sets  of  multiplier  and 
potato  onions  is  essentially  the  same  as  from  perennial  or  tree 
onions. 

The  variety  of  perennial  onion  most  extensively  grown  is 
known  as  the  Egyptian,  or  the  perennial  tree  onion.  It  is  also  re- 
ferred to  by  gardeners  as  the  “winter  onion,”  because  it  will  sur- 
vive the  winter  without  protection. 

Green  onions  for  late  use  may  be  grown  from  seed  sown  the 
same  as  for  the  production  of  ripe  onions;  but  usually  the  de- 
mand for  green  onions  is  not  so  great  at  that  season  of  the  year, 
and  seed  is  seldom  sown  especially  for  the  production  of  green 
onions.  It  is  customary  in  the  home  garden,  however,  to  pull 
green  onions  from  the  growing  crop  at  any  time  they  are  de- 
sired for  the  table.  Also,  market  gardeners  sometimes  harvest 
part  of  their  onion  crop  at  this  stage  if  the  demand  is  good.  If 
the  plants  stand  rather  thick,  this  pulling  of  some  of  the  green 
onions  amounts  only  to  a thinning  of  the  crop  that  remains. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  JULY,  1914 


CIRCULAR  No.  174 


TESTING  FOR  FAT  IN  MILK  BY  THE  BABCOCK  TEST 
Department  of  Dairy  Husbandry 


The  Babcock  test  is  the  most  satisfactory  and  practical  means  of 
determining  the  amount  of  butter  fat  in  milk.  It  is  the  test  generally 
used  as  a basis  of  payment  for  milk.  Commercial  plants,  altho  buying 
milk  by  the  hundredweight,  may  test  a sample  from  each  can  or  they 
may  make  but  one  average  test  for  a longer  period  of  time.  In  the 
latter  case,  a representative  sample  of  the  product  delivered  for  a one- 
or  two-week  period  is  made  by  mixing  small  samples  from  each  de- 
livery. The  test  of  this  sample  is  the  average  test  for  the  period 
covered. 

When  making  the  Babcock  test  to  determine  the  butter-fat  pro- 
duction of  a cow,  a representative  sample  is  the  first  and  most  impor- 
tant item.  The  fat  content  of  milk  varies  so  greatly  that  a sample  from 
a single  milking  will  not  give  an  average  test.  The  sample,  therefore, 


2 


should  be  “composite” ; that  is,  it  should  be  a mixture  of  samples  taken 
from  a number  of  milkings,  usually  for  a period  of  one  to  seven  days. 

Mason  jars  or  bottles  with  close-fitting  covers 
(Fig.  i)  should  be  provided  for  each  cow  that  is 
to  be  tested,  and  each  bottle  should  be  marked  with 
the  number  of  the  individual  animal.  After  the 
milk  from  a cow  is  thoroly  mixed  by  being  poured 
from  one  vessel  to  another  four  times,  the  sample 
is  taken  with  a small  dipper  (Fig.  2)  and  placed  in 
the  proper  bottle.  It  is  important  that  the  same 
amount  of  milk  be  dipped  each  time  a sample  is 
taken. 

Some  of  the  milk  in  the  sample  jar  will  be 
several  days  old  and  will  require  a preservative  to 
prevent  its  souring.  No.  2 corosive  sublimate  tab- 
lets, sold  by  creamery  supply  houses,  or  powdered 
potassium  bichromate  (K2  Cr2  07)  may  be  used 
for  this  purpose.  In  the  latter  case,  half  a gram, 
or  from  7 to  8 grains,  of  bichromate  (the  amount  that  can  be  held  on 
the  point  of  a knife)  will  be  sufficient.1  The  jars  containing  the  com- 
posite samples  should  be  gently  shaken  after  each  addition  of  milk. 
At  the  end  of  the  period  which  the  test  is  to  cover,  the  composite 
sample  for  each  cow  is  tested  for  butter  fat. 


Covered  Bottle  for 
Milk  Sample 


Apparatus 

The  apparatus  used  in  making  the  test  is  as  follows:  a milk  pi- 
pette of  17.6  cc.  capacity  for  measuring  the  milk  (Fig.  3)  ; a milk  test 

bottle  (Fig.  4)  ; an  acid  measure  of  17.5  cc.  capacity  (Fig.  5)  ; 

and  a tester  in  which  to  whirl  the  test  bottles  (Figs.  6,  7,  and  8). 

The  apparatus  for  farm  use  may  be  purchased  at  prices  varying  from 
$4  to  $14.  A cup  as  is  shown  in  Fig.  9 is  convenient  for  adding  the 
hot  water  to  the  test  bottles.  Dividers  may  be  used  to  measure  the 
length  of  the  fat  column  (Fig.  10). 

The  necessary  commercial  sulphuric  acid  may  be  secured  from  any 
creamery  supply  house,  or  small  amounts  may  be  purchased  from  any 
druggist.  • 


1Both  chemicals  mentioned  are  poisonous  and  should  be  used  with  caution. 


Figs.  2,  3,  4,  and  5 

(2)  Small  Dipper  for  Taking  Sample;  (3)  Pipette  for  Measuring  Milk; 
(4)  Milk  Test  Bottle;  (5)  Acid  Measure 


4 


Fig.  7. — Covered  Hand  Tester 


Fig.  8. — Steam  Tester 


5 


TESTING  WHOLE  MILK 

The  sample  to  be  tested  should  be  at  a temperature  of  550  to 
65°  F.  Mix  the  milk  thoroly  by  pouring  it  a number  of  times  back  and 
forth  from  the  sample  bottle  into  a clean  vessel,  taking  care  that 
all  curd  or  undistributed  lumps  of  cream  are  broken  down. 
Immediately  after  mixing,  draw  the  milk  up  above  the  mark 
on  the  pipette  and  hold  it  there  by  quickly  placing  the  forefinger  over 
the  end  of  the  stem ; release  the  pressure  of  the  finger  slightly,  allow- 
ing the  milk  to  run  down  to  the  mark  (this  is  easier  to  do  if  the  finger 
is  dry).  Then  transfer  the  pipette  of  milk  to  the  test  bottle,  allowing 
the  milk  to  flow  slowly  down  the  neck  of  the  bottle  and  blowing  the 
last  drop  into  the  bottle.  The  best  results  are  obtained  when  the 
pipette  and  the  test  bottle  are  held  at  a slight  angle  during  this  transfer. 


Fig.  9.T— A Convenient  Cup  for  Adding  Hot  Water  to  the  Test  Bottles 

Do  not  lose  any  of  the  milk  sample  in  the  process  of  mixing, 
measuring,  or  transferring,  for  the  Babcock  test  is  essentially  quanti- 
tative and  any  loss  affects  its  accuracy. 

After  transferring  the  milk  to  the  test  bottle,  measure  out  17.5  cc. 
of  commercial  sulphuric  acid  into  the  small  glass  cylinder  (Fig.  5)  and 
pour  it  into  the  test  bottle.  The  acid  should  be  about  the  same  tem- 
perature as  the  milk.  Hold  the  bottle  slanting  and  rotate  it  slowly 
so  that  the  acid  will  run  down  the  narrow  neck  and  carry  down  any 
milk  adhering  to  it.  After  the  acid  is  added,  mix  the  milk  and  acid 
with  a rotary  motion,  being  careful  not  to  force  any  of  the  mixture  in,- 
to  the  neck  of  the  bottle.  Keep  up  the  rotary  motion  until  all  the  curd 
has  been  dissolved  and  the  liquid  is  of  a dark  brown  color. 


6 


When  the  samples  to  be  tested  have  been  prepared,  put 
the  bottles  in  the  tester,  taking  care  to  place  them  opposite 
each  other  so  that  they  balance.  Turn  the  crank  the  required  number 
of  turns  per  minute  for  five  minutes;  then  without  removing  fill  each 
of  the  bottles  to  its  neck  with  hot  water  and  whirl  them  again  for 
two  minutes.  Add  more  hot  water  to  each  bottle  until  the  neck  is 
filled  to  within  half  an  inch  of  the  upper  limit  of  the  graduation  marks ; 
then  whirl  the  bottles  again  for  one  minute. 

If  the  foregoing  instructions  have  been  carefully  followed,  the 
neck  of  each  test  bottle  will  contain  a column  of  fat  which  should  be 
of  a clear  yellow  color.  The  test  is  now  ready  to  read. 

Reading  t^e  Test 

The  extremes  of  the  fat  in  the  neck  of  the  test  bottle  are  the 
limits  of  the  reading.  The  most  accurate  reading  is  made  when  the 
temperature  of  the  contents  of  the  bottle  is  130°  F. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  scale  on  the  neck  of  the  test  bottle  has 
ten  large  divisions,  and  that  each  of  these  is  subdivided  into  five  small 
divisions.  Each  of  the  ten  large  divisions  represents  one  per- 
cent, and  each  small  division,  0.2  percent.  If  the  fat  column  covers 
two  of  the  large  spaces  and  eight  of  the  small  ones,  as  illustrated  in 
Fig.  10  (four  small  spaces  on  either  side  of  the  large  spaces),  the  read- 
ing is  3.6  percent.  This  means  that  there  are  3.6  pounds  of  butter  fat 
in  every  100  pounds  of  the  milk  being  tested.  The  use  of  a pair  of 
dividers  to  measure  the  limits  of  the  fat  column  will  aid  in  securing 
greater  accuracy  in  reading  the  test. 


8 


Use  of  the  Test  in  Determining  Production 

In  order  to  determine  the  amount  of  butter 
fat  produced  by  a cow,  it  is  necessary  to  know 
the  amount  of  milk  produced  and  the  average  fat 
test  of  the  milk.  To  ascertain  the  milk  produc- 
tion, daily  weighings  should  be  taken,  and  the 
weights  set  down  immediately  on  a milk  sheet 
and  totaled  at  the  end  of  each  month.  The  most 
convenient  scale  for  weighing  the  milk  is  a spring 
balance  graduated  to  pounds  and  tenths  of  pounds, 
with  two  hands,  one  of  which  is  adjustable  so 
that  it  may  be  set  at  zero  with  the  empty  pail  on 
the  hook.  Such  scales  (Fig.  n)  may  be  obtained 
from  any  dairy  supply  house  for  about  $3.50. 
Most  of  these  houses  also  carry  suitable  milk 
sheets  in  stock.  When  the  scale  and  milk  sheet 
are  in  a convenient  place,  the  time  necessary  for 
taking  and  recording  these  weights  is  negligible. 

Records  which  have  been  kept  show  that  the 
yearly  production  of  a cow  can  be  closely  estimated 
from  the  weight  and  the  fat  test  of  the  milk  on  one 
or  two  days  of  each  month.  The  weights  and  com- 
posite samples  should  be  taken  from  two  or  four 
consecutive  milkings  at  the  middle  of  each  month.  In  using  this 
method  of  weighing,  the  total  milk  weight  should  be  divided  by  the 
number  of  days  during  which  weighings  were  made,  and  the  results 
multiplied  by  the  number  of  days  in  that  particular  month. 

The  pounds  of  milk  and  the  average  test  for  the  period  during 
which  the  milk  was  produced,  having  been  determined,  the  pounds  of 
fat  are  obtained  by  multiplying  the  pounds  of  milk  by  the  fat  test. 
This  is  illustrated  by  the  following  yearly  record  of  a cow  freshening 
December  16. 


Fig.  11 
Milk  Scale 


9 


Milk 

Test 

Butter  fat 

Month 

lbs. 

percent 

lbs. 

December 

540.3 

4-7 

254 

January 

915.5 

5-5 

50.4 

February 

880.4 

4-5 

47-5 

March 

866.3 

5-1 

44-2 

April 

7639 

5.6 

42.8 

May 

812.1 

5-6 

45-5 

June 

746.0 

5-2 

38.8 

July 

747-8 

5-0 

374 

August 

612.3 

5-3 

32.5 

September 

465.6 

5.8 

27.0 

October1 

295.0 

5-8 

17.1 

November 

,dry 

December 

dry 

7645.2 

5-34 

408.6 

xMilk  for  2i  days. 


TESTING  SKIM  MILK 

Skim  milk  for  testing  should  be  caught  at  the  separator  in  clean 
cans.  Utensils  that  have  just  previously  contained  whole  milk  or 
cream  should  not  be  used  unless  they  have  been  thoroly  cleaned,  as 
the  test  will  be  increased  by  particles  of  fat  adhering  to  the  sides  of 
the  can.  The  sample  should  be  taken  from  the  bulk  of  the  skim  milk 
after  it  has  been  well  mixed. 

The  apparatus  used  is  the  same  as  that  for  testing  whole  milk, 
except  that  a test  bottle  of  different  construction  is  required.  As  the 
amount  of  butter  fat  in  skim  milk  is  of  course  small,  it  is  necessary  that 
the  test  bottle  have  a neck  in  which  a very  small  amount  of  butter  fat 
may  be  read  in  terms  of  percent.  A skim-milk  bottle,  therefore,  is 
made  with  two  necks,  a large  one  thru  which  the  skim  milk  and  acid 
are  added,  and  a small,  graduated  one  in  which  the  fat  is  finally  se- 
cured and  read  (see  Figs.  12  and  13). 

Mix  the  sample  carefully,  as  described  for  the  whole-milk  test. 
Measure  17.6  cc.  of  the  sample  in  the  pipette  and  transfer  to  the  test 
bottle,  allowing  it  to  flow  down  the  large  neck.  Then  add  the  acid  as 
in  the  whole-milk  test,  using  about  20  cc.  instead  of  17.5  cc.  If  the 
acid  is  added  in  small  quantities,  and  the  sample  is  carefully  shaken 
after  each  addition,  better  results  will  be  obtained  than  if  the  total 
amount  is  added  at  once.  Care  must  be  exercised  to  avoid  forcing 
small  lumps  of  curd  into  the  calibrated  neck  when  mixing  the  acid 
with  the  milk. 


Figs.  12  and  13— Skim-Milk  Bottles 


II 


When  putting  the  bottles  into  the  tester,  place  the  large  filling  tube 
toward  the  center.  Unless  this  is  done,  a portion  of  the  fat  will  not 
gather  in  the  calibrated  neck,  and  the  test  will  thereby  be  rendered  in- 
accurate. Whirl  the  bottles  and  add  water  as  in  the  test  for  whole 
milk,  but  run  the  centrifuge  from  two  to  five  minutes  longer. 

The  test  should  be  read  at  130°  to  140°  F.  In  the  type  of  test 
bottle  shown  in  Fig.  12,  each  of  the  graduation  marks  has  a value  of 
0.05  percent.  In  the  type  shown  in  Fig.  13,  each  small  graduation  has 
a value  of  0.01  percent  and  each  large  graduation  represents  five  small 
graduations,  or  0.05  percent. 

It  is  difficult  to  get  an  absolutely  accurate  test  of  skim  milk.  At 
best  the  results  should  be  considered  only  as  approximations.  Butter- 
milk and  whey  may  be  tested  by  this  same  method,  except  that  in  mak- 
ing the  whey  test  only  three-quarters  of  a measure  of  acid  is  added. 

SUGGESTIONS 

The  fat  column  should  be  a clear  yellow  color,  and  free  from 
charred  material  or  curd.  The  limits  should  be  well  defined.  If  the 
fat  column  is  not  uniform  and  has  pieces  of  dark  material  in  it,  it  is 
evident  that  the  acid  was  too  strong,  or  that  the  milk  and  acid  were  too 
warm.  When  repeating  the  process,  use  less  acid  or  cool  the  acid  and 
milk  to  55°-65°  F.  If  the  fat  column  is  gray  and  cloudy,  with  pieces 
of  undissolved  curd  in  it,  use  more  acid. 

It  is  best  to  use  rain  water  for  filling  the  bottles ; if  hard  water 
is  used,  it  is  advisable  to  add  several  drops  of  sulphuric  acid  in  order 
to  precipitate  the  minerals  present. 

Sulphuric  acid  is  very  active,  attacking  all  organic  matter  with 
which  it  comes  in  contact.  Keep  it  in  a glassrstoppered  bottle.  If 
some  accidentally  gets  on  the  hands  or  clothing,  wash  immediately  with 
cold  water. 

Read  the  tests  before  they  have  cooled,  or  warm  them  to  i30°-i40° 
F.  by  setting  them  in  water  at  that  temperature. 

Keep  the  test  bottles  clean.  Empty  them  before  the  fat  has 
solidified  in  the  necks.  Shaking  the  bottles  while  emptying  them  will 
aid  in  removing  the  sediment  in  the  bottom.  In  washing  them  use 
a testrbottle  brush. 


. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 

URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  JULY,  1914 
CIRCULAR  No.  175 

ECONOMIC  FACTORS  IN  CATTLE  FEEDING 

IV.  CATTLE  FEEDING  CONDITIONS  IN  THE  CORN  BELT 

By  Herbert  W.  Mumford  and  Louis  I).  Hall 


Total  Cattle  Other  Than  Milch  Cows  in  Corn-Belt  States 


* MILLIONS 

0 2 4 6 8 10  12  14  16 


1870 


1880 


1910 


1911 


1912 


1913 


Summary 


1.  Introduction. — Seven  corn-surplus  states — Ohio,  Indiana,  Illi- 

nois, Missouri,  Kansas,  and  Nebraska — embrace  the  corn  belt,  which  is 
the  natural  center  of  beef  production.  About  one-third  of  the  cattle  of 
the  country  other  than  milch  cows  are  contained  in  the  states  named, 
and  their  value  is  equal  to  about  two-fifths  of  the  total  value  of  such 
cattle  in  the  United  States.  Page  5 

2.  Rapid  Evolution  of  the  Industry. — Twenty  to  fifty  years  ago, 
the  corn  belt  as  a whole  was  a combined  breeding,  grazing  and  fattening 
ground  for  beef  cattle,  but  now  it  is  so  generally  devoted  to  corn  raising 
that  little  grazing  land — consequently  few  breeding  cattle — remain;  and 
a large  proportion  of  the  cattle  fattened  for  market  are  purchased  as 
feeders  from  the  West  or  elsewhere.  The  number  of  cattle  other  than 
milch  cows  appears  to  be  diminishing  thruout  the  corn  belt,  and  in  some 
typical  districts  is  now  no  greater  than  it  was  forty  years  ago.  Page  5. 

3.  Influence  of  Dairying. — Statistics  of  cattle  in  corn-belt  states 

indicate  a proportion  of  milch  cows  amounting  to  about  one-half  of  the 
total  cattle  in  the  eastern  section,  one-fourth  in  Kansas  and  Nebraska, 
and  corresponding  proportions  in  intervening  states.  Dairying  has  in- 
creased enormously  as  a.  factor  in  the  cattle  industry.  The  introduction 
of  dairy  cattle  and  indiscriminate  breeding  has  deteriorated  the  quality 
of  beef  cattle,  and  at  the  same  time  tlxe  actual  number  of  cattle  worthy 
of  the  name  of  milch  cows  has  increased  but  little.  Relatively  more 
steers  are  found  in  the  western  than  in  the  eastern  portion  of  the  corn 
belt.  Page  10 

4.  Fattening  Steers. — Four-fifths  to  nine-tenths  of  the  beef 

cattle  marketed  from  typical  corn-belt  localities  are  cattle  that  have 
been  purchased  as  stockers  or  feeders.  The  number  of  stockers  and 
feeders  shipped  to  the  country  from  Chicago  and  Missouri  river  markets 
shows  a considerable  increase  by  decades.  The  fattening  of  cattle  has 
passed  largely  from  the  hands  of  general  farmers  to  those  of  profes- 
sional cattle  feeders,  and  in  some  sections  has  been  abandoned  to  a 
considerable  extent  by  the  latter.  Among  the  chief  factors  responsible 
for  this  tendency  are  relatively  high  prices  for  grain  compared  with 
those  for  fat  cattle,  increase  in  land  values,  extension  of  cattle  feeding 
operations  in  the  West,  increase  in  farm  tenancy,  and  neglect  of  soil 
fertility.  Page  12 

5.  The  Outlook.— The  undeveloped  state  of  beef-cattle  produc- 
tion in  proportion  to  population  and  area  justifies  the  expectation  of  an 
ultimate  extension  and  development  of  cattle  raising  and  feeding.  Corn- 
fed  beef  cattle  doubtless  will  continue  in  demand  by  a class  of  trade  in 
which  the  grass  beef  of  the  West  can  not  compete.  The  grazing  lands 
of  the  West  may  be  expected  to  furnish  a partial  supply  of  stockers  and 
feeders  to  the  corn  belt  for  many  years  to  come;  however,  an  increasing 


proportion,  and  eventually  a large  proportion,  of  the  cattle  matured  in 
the  corn  belt  must  be  reared  there.  Page  15 

Improved  and  intensified  farming  methods,  the  introduction  of  corn 
silage,  alfalfa  and  other  forage  crops,  the  more  complete  utilization  of 
waste  roughage,  and  increased  attention  to  manure  as  a means  of  main- 
taining fertility  will  tend  to  render  cattle  production  more  practicable. 
Nevertheless,  those  upon  whom  the  cattle  feeder  is  dependent  for  his 
market  must  consider  the  increasing  cost  of  producing  cattle  and  pay 
prices  commensurate  therewith;  the  resumption  and  extension  of  beef 
production  will  come  only  as  a result  of  higher  relative  prices  for  fat 
cattle.  Page  17 

Note. — This  is  the  fourth  of  a series  of  circulars  dealing  with  eco- 
nomic factors  in  cattle  feeding.  The  circulars  that  have  been  published 
are:  No.  163,  Relation  of  the  United  States  to  the  World’s  Beef  Supply; 
No.  164,  Argentina  as  a Factor  in  International  Beef  Trade;  No.  169,  A 
Review  of  Beef  Production  in  the  United  States.  The  next  circular  in 
the  series  will  treat  of  cattle  feeding  in  its  relation  to  farm  management 
and  soil  fertility. 


CATTLE  FEEDING  CONDITIONS  IN  THE 
CORN  BELT 


By  Herbert  W.  Mumford,  Chief  in  Animal  Husbandry,  and 
Louis  D.  Hall,  Assistant  Chief  in  Animal  Husbandry 

Seven  “corn-surplus  states” — Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Iowa, 
Missouri,  Kansas,  and  Nebraska — embrace  the  great  corn-pro- 
ducing area  and  constitute  the  natural  center  of  beef  production 
in  the  United  States.  As  shown  in  Circular  No.  169,  about  one- 
third  of  the  cattle  of  the  country  other  than  milch  cows  are  con- 
lained  in  the  states  mentioned,  and  their  value  is  equal  to  about 
two-fifths  of  the  total  value  of  such  cattle  in  the  United  States. 
Furthermore,  large  numbers  of  cattle  are  shipped  into  these  states 
to  be  fattened  and  forwarded  to  market,  and  are  not  included  in 
the  estimates  of  annual  cattle  population.  Corn-fed  cattle  are  the 
distinctive  feature  of  the  cattle  industry  of  the  United  States,  and 
this  circular  deals  primarily  with  problems  and  methods  of  cattle 
feeding  in  the  corn  belt.  It  is  therefore  proper  to  consider  some- 
what fully  the  trend  of  general  conditions  surrounding  the  indus- 
try in  that  section  and  the  fundamental  economic  factors  that 
affect  it. 

Rapid  Evolution  of  the  Cattle  Feeding  Industry 

During  the  period  of  settlement  and  the  earlier  years  of  cul- 
tivation of  corn-belt  lands — a period  extending  from  the  fifties 
to  the  nineties  inclusive,  of  the  last  century, — these  lands  gen- 
erally were  stocked  with  cows  of  beef  type ; and  while  the  coun- 
try was  being  brought  into  cultivation*  they  became  a combined 
breeding,  grazing,  and  fattening  ground  for  cattle.  Such  local- 
ities were  admirably  suited  to  beef  production  because  of  the 
abundance  of  cheap  grass  and  cheap  corn  they  afforded.  A most 
vivid  and  concise  illustration  of  cattle-feeding  conditions  and 
methods  in  Illinois  about  1880  is  contained  in  the  following 
statement  quoted  from  one  of  the  most  widely  known  stockmen 
of  that  day,  Mr.  John  D.  Gillette:1 


l Feeds  and  Feeding,  W.  A.  Henry,  1st  ed.,  p.  389. 


6 


Cost  of  Steer  Twelve  Months  Old 

Value  of  calf  at  birth $3.00 

Expenses  of  dam  of  calf,  chargeable  to  calf  for  one  year  as  follows: 

8 percent  interest  on  $50,  value  of  cow 4.00 

Keep  of  yearling  and  feed  of  cow  12  months 12.25 

Insurance  on  cow 1.00 

Risk  of  failure  of  cow  to  breed 1.75 

Loss  of  calves  by  death,  etc 1.00 

No  corn  fed  up  to  12  months. 

Value  of  pasture  and  keep  up  to  12  months 6.00 

Total 29.00 

Weight  of  calf  at  12  months,  700  pounds,  at  5 cents 35.00 

Profit  at  12  months  of  age 6.00 

Cost  From  Twelve  to  Twenty-four  Months  of  Age 

Value  of  steer  at  12  months  of  age 35.00 

Value  of  shock  corn,  110  bushels,  at  35  cents 38.50 

Pasture  12  to  24  months  3.00 

Interest  and  risk  2.80 

Total 79.30 

Less  500  pounds  of  pork  made  on  droppings  of  steer,  at  5 cents. . 25.00 

Net  cost  12  to  24  months. . 54.30 

Weight  of  steer  at  24  months,  1,600  pounds,  at  QV2  cents 104.00 

Profit  at  24  months  of  age 49.70 

Cost  From  Twenty-four  to  Thirty-six  Months  of  Age 

Value  of  steer  at  24  months  of  age 104.00 

Value  of  shock  corn  consumed  in  entire  year,  125  bu.,  at  35  cents.  43.75 

Pasture,  May  1 to  Nov.  1 4.00 

Interest  and  risk  8.32 

Total 160.07 

Less  500  pounds  pork  at  5 cents,  made  on  droppings  of  steer. . . . 25.00 

Cost  at  36  months  of  age. . 135.07 

Weight  at  36  months  of  age,  2,200  pounds,  at  7 cents 154.00 

Profit  at  36  months  of  age 18.93 


/ 


As  the  remarkable  corn-growing  possibilities  of  the  soil  and 
climate  in  the  corn  belt  became  more  and  more  evident  and  the 
demand  for  corn  grew  greater,  the  westward  movement  of  agri- 
culture naturally  stimulated  the  growing  of  corn  and,  to  a cor- 
responding degree,  diminished  the  area  of  grazing  land.  Grad- 
ually, but  surely,  the  plow  drove  out  the  cow  until  in  the  heart 
of  the  corn  country  but  few  females  of  the  beef  type  remained. 
For  thirty  years  or  more  in  some  such  sections,  it  has  been  a 
proverb  that  “it  does  not  pay  to  keep  a cow  a year  for  the  chance 
of  a calf.” 

At  the  same  time  that  conditions  within  the  corn  belt  were 
tending  to  reduce  the  rearing  of  beef  cattle  there,  the  industry 
was  extending  on  the  great  breeding  ground  of  the  Southwest  and 
the  grazing  lands  of  the  West  (see  Circular  No.  169).  Thus  an 
increasing  supply  of  cheap  stockers  and  feeders  from  the  range 
was  a further  large  factor  in  causing  the  abandonment 
of  cattle  raising  by  many  farmers,  who  reasoned — and  logically 
so — that  calves  could  be  produced  and  grown  more  econom- 
ically on  the  cheap  grass  lands  of  the  West  than  on  corn-belt 
farms.  Moreover,  the  attractive  opportunities  which  the  range 
country  offered  the  cattleman  induced  many  live-stock  farmers 
of  the  Mississippi  valley  to  migrate  west,  thus  diminishing  still 
further  the  proportion  of  cattle  feeders  to  grain  growers  in  the 
central  states. 

The  extent  to  which  this  change  in  conditions  has  affected 
beef  production  is  indicated  somewhat  accurately  by  the  results 
of  inquiries  that  have  been  made  on  an  extensive  scale  among 
cattle  feeders  of  Illinois  and  Indiana.  In  1902  this  experiment 
station  secured  reports  of  methods  used  by  509  cattle  feeders  in 
Illinois,  and  found  that  only  12  percent  raised  their  entire  supply 
of  feeding  cattle.1  It  was  estimated  that  only  about  15  percent  of 
the  native  steers  marketed  in  Chicago  from  Illinois  were  carried 
from  birth  to  maturity  without  changing  hands.  2 

The  Indiana  Experiment  Station  in  1906  investigated  the 
methods  of  929  cattle  feeders  in  Indiana,  and  reported  that  “only 
6 percent  are  really  beef  producers,  that  is,  breeding  their  own 


1 111.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.,  Circ.  No.  88,  p.  1. 

2 IH.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.  Circ.  No.  79,  p.  6. 


8 


Corn-Belt  States,  Showing  Number  of  Beef  Cattle  in  Each  in  1913 


9 


cattle  and  feeding  them  out.”  About  one-half  of  the  total  number 
raised  a part  of  their  feeding  cattle,  and  42  percent  made  a prac- 
tice of  purchasing  all  their  feeders.  1 

It  is  significant  that  a considerably  smaller  proportion  of 
breeders  was  found  in  Indiana  than  in  Illinois.  AJtho  the  data 
are  not  strictly  comparable,  owing  to  possible  differences  in  the 
class  of.  cattle  feeders  represented  and  an  interval  of  four  years 
between  the  two  investigations,  it  is  undoubtedly  true  that  the 
decrease  in  the  proportion  of  breeders  to  feeders  of  beef  cattle 
has  moved  gradually  from  the  eastern  to  the  western  border  of 
the  corn  belt. 

Notwithstanding  the  abandonment  of  cattle  breeding  by  a 
majority  of  the  more  extensive  beef  producers,  the  aggregate 
number  of  cattle  in  the  region  under  consideration  shows  an 
increase  from  1870  to  1910,  altho  in  but  few  instances  did  it  keep 
pace  with  the  population.  This  is  due  mainly  to  the  large  num- 
ber of  farmers  who  keep  only  a few  cattle  to  furnish  the  family 
supply  of  milk  and  beef  and  to  consume  the  waste  roughage  and 
forage  of  the  farm.  The  statistics  for  the  years  1911,  1912,  and 
1913  show  an  actual  decrease  in  the  number  of  cattle  in  the  corn 
belt.  In  order  to  illustrate  this  point  more  fully,  Table  1 is  pre- 
sented. 


Table  1. — Number  of  Cattle  Other  than  Milch  Cows  in  the 
Corn -Belt  States 


States 

18701 

18901 

191 02 

1911s 

1912s 

19134 

Ohio 

Indiana. .. 
Illinois.... 
Iowa..  . . 
Missouri  . 
Kansas. . . 
Nebraska. 

801  000 
750  000 
1 224  000 
815  000 
731  000 
346  000 
55  000 

918  000 
1 054  000 

1 765  000 

2 680  000 
1 819  000 
1 921  000 
1 346  000 

978000 
1 020  000 

1 974  000 
3 611  000 

2 165  000 

3 260  000 
3 040  000 

942  000 
744  000 

1 391  000 

2 919  000 

1 67 1 000 

2 202  000 
2 225  000 

885  000 
707  000 
1 266  000 
2 773  000 
1 50'.  000 

1 872  000 

2 002  000 

814  000 
686  000 
1 228  000 
2 607  000 
1 444  000 
1 778  000 
1 902  000 

Total... 

4 722  000 

11  503  000 

16  048  000 

12  094  000 

11  009  000 

10  459  000 

1 U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Bur.  An.  Indus.,  Ann.  Rept.  1897,  pp.  267-289. 

2 U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1909,  p.  572. 

3 U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1911,  p.  630. 

4 U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1912,  p.  682. 


l Ind.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.,  Circ.  No.  12,  p.  11. 


10 


Influence  of  Dairying 


The  remarkable  growth  of  large  and  small  cities  thruout  this 
fertile  section  resulted  in  a corresponding  demand  for  milk  and 
butter.  This  could  be  met  only  by  the  establishment  of  dairy 
farms  within  comparatively  short  distances  from  the  cities  and 
an  increased  production  of  dairy  products  on  general  farms; 
whereas  the  supply  of  beef  could  readily  be  secured  from 
greater  distances,  especially  in  view  of  the  increasing  beef  pro- 
duction of  the  range  country  at  this  time. 

Table  2 shows  the  actual  number  of  milch  cows  and  also  the 
proportion  of  milch  cows  to  total  cattle  in  the  corn-belt  states  by 
twenty-year  periods  since  1870,  including  1913. 


Table  2. — Number  of  Milgh  Cows  in  the  Corn-Belt  States 


00 

^jf 

© 

18901 

191 02 

191 33 

States 

Number 

Pet.  of 
total 
cattle 

Number 

1 Pet.  of 
total 
| cattle 

Number 

Pet.  of 
total 
cattle 

Number 

Q r— . 03 

Ohio 

734  000 

48 

783  000 

46 

947  000 

49 

869  000 

52 

Indiana... 

435  000 

37 

608  000 

36 

687  000 

40 

634  000 

48 

rilinois. . . 

083  000 

36  | 

1 094  000 

38 

1 232  000 

38 

1 007  000 

45 

Iowa..  .. 

465  000 

36  1 

1 279  000 

32 

1 5705000 

30 

1 337  000 

34 

Missouri.. 

371  000 

34  1 

813  000 

31 

925  000 

30 

789  000 

35 

Kansas. . . 

162  000 

32  1 

758  000 

28 

737  000 

18 

698  000 

28 

Nebraska. 

35  000 

39  1 

424  000 

24 

879  000 

22 

607  000 

24 

1 U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Bur.  An.  Indus.,  Ann.  Rept.  1897,  pp.  267-289. 

2 U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1909,  p.  572. 

3 U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agr.,  Yearbook  1912,  p.  682. 


Passing  from  the  eastern  to  the  western  states  of  the  corn 
belt,  the  percentages  in  the  right-hand  column  show  a remark- 
ably uniform  decrease  in  the  proportion  of  milch  cows.  Approx- 
imately one-half  of  the  cattle  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Illinois  are 
classified  as  milch  cows,  while  only  about  one-fourth  of  those  of 
Kansas  and  Nebraska  are  so  classified. 

As  in  the  case  of  beef  cattle,  the  increase  in  the  number  of 
milch  cows  has  been  much  less  marked  during  the  last  twenty 
years  than  in  the  previous  period,  owing  to  the  less  pronounced 
changes  in  population  and  industrial  development.  The  slight 
increase  in  the  proportion  of  milch  cows  to  the  total  number  of 
cattle  in  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Illinois  during  forty  years  does  not 


11 


adequately  represent  the  increased  importance  of  dairying  as  a 
factor  in  the  cattle  industry,  nor  the  extent  to  which  the  dairy 
type  predominates  in  the  cattle  stock  of  the  states  mentioned.  It 
is  a result  of  the  extension  of  general  farming  and  the  neglect  of 
systematic  beef-cattle  breeding,  together  with  a great  tendency  on 
the  part  of  the  average  farmer  to  cross-breed  cattle  of  the  beef 
and  dairy  types,  thereby  deteriorating  the  quality  of  both.  In  this 
way  the  relative  number  of  animals  worthy  of  the  name  of  milch 
cows  has  been  limited,  and  at  the  same  time  in  most  corn-belt 
localities,  the  production  of  steers  suitable  for  the  feed  lot  has 
very  nearly  approached  the  vanishing  point. 

The  marked  decrease  in  the  proportion  of  milch  cows  to  the 
total  number  of  cattle  in  the  four  states  west  of  Illinois,  in  spite 
of  a large  increase  in  their  actual  numbers,  is  explained  by  the 
general  movement  of  range  cattle  into  those  states  from  the 
Southwest  and  West.  It  is  likely  with  increased  population  and 
the  adoption  cf  intensive  systems  of  agriculture,  the  proportion 
of  milch  cows  will  approach  mure  nearly  that  of  the  states  farther 
east. 

Further  light  may  be  thrown  on  the  types  and  classes  of 
cattle  kept  on  corn-belt  farms  by  summarizing  the  returns  of  the 
United  States  Census  relating  to  age  and  sex  of  cattle.  Figures 
from  the  Twelfth  Census  are  presented  because  of  the  more 
minute  classification  it  affords  in  this  particular. 


Table  3. — Relative  Proportion  of  Various  Classes  of  Cattle  in  the 
Corn -Belt  States  in  19001 


States 

M c,  1 1 
13  QJ  CS 
> ~C  13 
cS  ^ 

Steers  1 and 
under  2 
years 

Steers  2 
and  under 
3 years 

Steers  3 
years  and 
over 

Bulls  1 
year  and 
over 

Heifers  1 
and  under 
2 years 

Dairy  cows 
2 years 
and  over 

Other  cows 
2 years 
and  over 

Total 

nerct. 

perct. 

perct. 

perct. 

perct. 

perct. 

perct.  perct. 

perct. 

Ohio 

23.6 

10.6 

6.9 

1.4 

1.9 

10.4 

41.0 

4.2 

100 

Indiana 

25.0 

11.9 

8.3 

2.1 

1.7 

10.7 

35.2 

5.1 

100 

Illinois 

22.8 

11.4 

9.5 

3.7 

1.9 

10.4 

33.1 

7.2 

100 

Iowa  

23.8 

13.5 

11.2 

3.2 

1.7 

10.9 

27.2- 

8.5 

100 

Missouri 

21.1 

12.7 

12.0 

5.2 

1.4 

10.3 

26.6 

10.7 

100 

Kansas 

20.5 

12.4 

11.7 

9.5 

1.4 

9.9 

15.7 

18.9 

100 

Nebraska  

23.6 

12.5 

9.9 

3.9 

1.6 

10.8 

16.7 

21.0 

100 

Average 

22.7 

12.4 

1 10.4 

4.6 

1.6 

10.5 

26.1 

11.7 

100 

l Calculated  from  Abstract  of  Twelfth  Census,  1900,  pp.  238,  240,  246,  247. 


12 


The  smaller  proportion  of  milch  cows  in  the  more  westerly 
states,  as  previously  shown,  is  here  verified,  and  a correspond- 
ingly larger  proportion  of  other  cows  is  noted. 

Relatively  more  steers  are  found  in  the  western  portion  of 
the  corn  belt,  and  the  difference  is  more  marked  in  the  case  of  the 
older  than  in  that  of  the  younger  steers,  thus  showing  the  natural 
tendency  to  keep  cattle  longer  in  those  sections  of  the  country 
where  pasture  lands  are  both  cheaper  and  more  abundant.  With 
respect  to  the  proportion  of  calves  under  one  year,  heifers  under 
two  years,  and  bulls,  the  data  show  no  striking  differences;  and 
likewise,  with  regard  to  the  proportion  of  bulls  to  cows  and  the 
proportion  of  calves  to  cows,  the  various  sections  of  the  corn 
belt  appear  comparatively  similar. 

Table  4 gives  available  data  from  the  Thirteenth  Census. 
While  these  data  are  not  in  all  respects  comparable  with  similar 
data  from  the  Twelfth  Census,  they  show  the  same  general  ten- 
dencies. 


Table  4.— Relative  Proportions  of  Various  Classes  of  Cattle  in 
the  Corn-Belt  States  in  19101 


States 

Calves 

Steers 

and 

bulls 

Year- 

ling 

heifers 

Dairy 

cows 

Other 

cows 

Unclas- 

sified 

animals 

Total 

perct. 

perct. 

perct. 

perct. 

perct. 

perct. 

perct. 

Ohio 

13.9 

16.3 

12,8 

49.3 

7.7  . 

100 

Indiana 

13.5 

16.9 

13.3 

46.5 

9.8 

100 

Illinois 

13.3 

19.5 

12.6 

43.0 

11.6 

100 

Iowa . 

12.8 

29.1 

12.7 

31.6 

13.8 

100 

Missouri  . . . 

1 1.6 

31.0 

12.0 

33.4 

12.0 

100 

Kansas2 

12.4 

34.1 

10.9 

23.9 

18  1 

0.6 

100 

Nebraska2.  . . 

12.5 

30.0 

12,4 

21.0 

24.0 

0.1 

100 

Average. . . 

12.8 

! 26.9 

12.3 

33  2 

14.7 

0.1 

100 

1 Calculated  from  Abstract  of  Thirteenth  Census,  1910,  pp.  316,  317. 

2 Includes  unclassified  animals. 


Fattening  Steers  in  the  Corn  Belt 

Notwithstanding  the  rapid  extension  of  the  acreage  devoted 
to  corn  growing,  and  the  great  demand  that  has  arisen  for  corn 
for  other  than  feeding  nurposes,  the  crop  is  still  fed  chiefly  to 
farm  animals.  As  nearly  as  can  be  estimated.  80  percent  of  the 
‘ecrn  produced  in  the  United  States  is  fed  to  live  stock.1  It  is.  of 


*111.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.  Circ.  No.  140,  p.  9. 


13 


course,  more  largely  sold  off  the  farms  of  the  corn-belt  states  than 
those  of  other  sections  of  the  country,  but  probably  not  far  from 
one-half  of  the  crop  of  Illinois  is  fed  on  the  farm.1  A temporary 
curtailment  of  one  branch  or  another  of  the  live-stock  industry, 
especially  cattle  and  hog  feeding,  is  so  promptly  reflected  in  a 
reduced  corn  market  that  stock  feeding  is  quickly  resumed  to  a 
greater  or  less  extent,  tho  with  increasing  reluctance  and  mis- 
givings. This  applies  especially  to  fattening  cattle,  as  this  branch 
of  live-stock  production  offers  the  most  immediate  and  ready 
means  of  disposing  of  large  quantities  of  corn,  and  at  the  same 
time  utilizes  much  otherwise  wasted  roughage,  such  as  stalk 
fields,  corn  stover,  and  straw. 

That  beef  production  in  the  corn  belt  has  become  largely  a 
steer-fattening  enterprise  apart  from  breeding  is  clearly  demon- 
strated by  the  investigations  of  the  Illinois  and  Indiana  Experi- 
ment Stations  quoted  in  a preceding  paragraph.  In  Illinois  it  was 
found  that  in  1902  more  than  one-half  of  the  cattlemen  from 
whom  reports  were  obtained  were  feeders  who  purchased  the 
cattle  they  finished  for  market;  in  addition,  more  than  one-third 
were  both  feeders  and  breeders,  but  even  the  latter  purchased 
most  of  their  feeding  cattle.2  About  85  percent  of  the  native  beef 
steers  marketed  in  Chicago  were  fattened  after  having  been  pur- 
chased as  stockers  and  feeders.3  In  Indiana  in  1906,  929  reports 
were  received  from  cattlemen  in  that  state,  of  whom  42  percent 
were  found  to  purchase  all  their  feeding  cattle  and  52  percent 
grew  only  a part  of  them  and  bought  the  remainder.4 

The  extent  and  tendency  of  this  important  phase  of  the  in- 
dustry are  also  shown  in  a measure  by  the  shipments  of  stockers 
and  feeders  from  the  large  cattle  markets  during  recent  decades 
(see  Table  5) . 

In  the  evolution,  or  transition,  of  corn-belt  beef  production 
from  a cattle-raising  to  a steer-feeding  proposition  with  a large 
proportion  of  the  feeders  purchased  at  the  large  markets,  the 
business,  to  a considerable  extent,  has  gravitated  into  the  hands 
of  men  who  handle  comparatively  large  numbers  of  cattle — from 
a few  carldads  to  several  hundred  head.  Tho  these  professional 
cattle  feeders  in  most  cases  are  farmers,  they  usually  buy  all 

mi  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.,  Circ.  No.  140,  p.  8. 

2I11.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.,  Circ.  No.  88,  p.  1. 

, 3I11.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.,  Circ.  No.  79.  p.  6. 

4Ind.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.,  Circ.  No.  12.  p.  12. 


14 


Table  5. — Shipments  ofStockers  and  Feeders  from  Various  Markets1 


Markets 

1880 

1890 

1900 

1910 

1913 

Chicago2 

300  000 
724  0004 
294  000 
75  0008  i 
51  0009 
114  000 
176  0004 

406  000 
i 631  000 
431  000 
! 102  000 
60  000 
251  000 
178  000 

380  000 
914  000 
405  000 
159  000 
67  000 
262  000 
220  000 

Kansas  City.. 
Omaha5 

130  0003 

647  0003 
266  0006 

St.  Louis7. . . 
St.  Joseph2  . . 

St-  Paul5  

130  00010 

Sioux  City2. . . 

Indianapolis11. 
Louisville7 .... 

42  000 

Ft.  Worth12.  . . 

493  000 

Denver11 

Buffalo11 

1 

1 From  reports  of  Stock  Yards  Companies. 

2 Statistics  for  .1880  and  1890  not  obtainable. 

3 Estimated. 

4 1905.  Statistics  for  1900  not  obtainable. 

5 Statistics  for  1880  not  obtainable. 

6 1897.  Statistics  for  1890  not  obtainable. 

7 Statistics  for  1880,  1890,  and  1900  not  obtainable. 

8 1908.  Statistics  for  1900  not  obtainable. 

9 1901.  Statistics  for  1900  not  obtainable. 

10  1898.  Statistics  for  1890  not  obtainable. 

11  Cattle  shipments  not  classified  as  to  Stockers  and  feeders. 

12  Statistics  for  1880,  1890,  1900,  and  1910  not  obtainable. 

their  feeding  cattle  and  a large  part  of  the  corn  they  feed,  use  but 
little  of  the  manure  produced,  and  freely  admit  the  large  element 
of  speculation  incurred.  The  capital,  risk,  business  skill,  and 
distance  from  markets  involved  in  cattle  feeding  necessarily  deter 
many  farmers  from  converting  their  corn  into  beef.  The  proper 
place  and  purpose  of  beef  production  in  the  corn  belt,  however, 
is  to  provide  a profitable  market  for  the  crops  grown  on  the  farm 
and  at  the  same  time  conserve  the  fertility  of  the  soil.  These  con- 
siderations are  of  greater  consequence  to  the  small  farmer  than 
to  the  “big  feeder.”  It  is  therefore  essential  to  the  welfare  of  agri- 
culture that  the  business  should  be  distributed  more  generally 
'among  farms  of  average  size  instead  of  being  concentrated  in  the 
hands  of  a few  farmers  and  capitalists  whose  farms,  as  well  as 
their  fortunes,  are  frequently  enriched  at  the  expense  of  the 
neighbors  whose  corn  they  buy.  With  a reasonable  degree  of 
skill  in  buying,  feeding,  and  marketing,  it  is  ordinarily  safe  and 
usually  profitable  for  the  general  farmer  to  engage  in  the  fatten- 
ing of  steers. 

In  some  sections  of  the  corn  belt,  cattle  feeding  has  not  only 


15 


passed  largely  from  the  hands  of  general  farmers  to  the  large 
feeders,  but  has  also  been  abandoned  to  a considerable  extent  by 
the  latter.  This  tendency  may  be  assigned  to  several  causes: 
(1)  Prices  of  grain  have  been  relatively  higher  than  those  of 
cattle j and  inducements  to  sell  corn  for  cash  at  the  elevator  in- 
stead of  feeding  have  therefore  been  strong.  (2)  Land  has 
increased  rapidly  in  value,  and  it  is  a prevalent  idea  that  high- 
priced  land  prohibits  profitable  cattle  feeding.  As  a matter  of 
fact,  the  actual  influence  of  this  factor  is  usually  insignificant  as 
compared  with  prices  of  corn  and  cattle  in  determining  the  profit 
in  feeding  cattle.  Increased  value  of  farm  lands  has  made  it  pos- 
sible for  many  cattlemen  to  retire  or  to  relinquish  active  manage- 
ment of  their  farms  to  others  less  competent  to  engage  profitably 
in  the  business.  (3)  Opportunities  for  cattle  feeding  in  vari- 
ous portions  of  the  West  have  attracted  many  successful  cattle 
feeders  from  the  older  sections  of  the  corn  belt.  The  opportun- 
ities for  exclusive  grain  growing  in  these  newer  regions  have  not 
been  equally  attractive;  hence  there  has  been  a tendency  for  a 
large  exodus  of  live-stock  producers,  while  the  grain  growers 
more  generally  have  remained.  (4)  The  farms  in  many  of  the 
older,  more  prosperous  communities  have  become  occupied 
largely  by  tenants.  The  prevailing  system  of  short-term  leases 
and  a lack  of  experience  in  feeding  cattle  on  the  part  of  tenants 
have  resulted  in  a marked  decrease  not  only  in  cattle  feeding  but 
in  the  production  of  live  stock  of  all  kinds.  (5)  The  apparent 
continuation  of  satisfactory  crop  yields  in  a large  part  of  the 
corn  belt  has  resulted  in  a failure  to  appreciate  the  value  and 
necessity  of  manure.  This  fact  has  blinded  most  farmers  to  an 
important  factor  in  cattle  feeding.  (6)  The  fact  that  cattle, 
ready  for  the  feed  lot,  could  be  produced  cheaper  in  the  West 
than  in  the  corn  belt  has  caused  the  general  farmer,  who  pro- 
duced his  own  feeders  and  did  not  use  enough  cattle  to  pay  to  buy 
them  from  the  western  country,  to  go  out  of  the  live-stock  busi- 
ness. That  is,  at  the  prevailing  prices  he  could  not  compete  in 
the  production  of  beef  with  the  “big  feeder,”  who  was  able  to 
place  his  cattle  in  the  feed  lot  at  a lower  cost  than  they  could  be 
produced  in  the  corn  belt. 

The  Outlook 

In  the  light  of  conditions  set  forth  in  this  and  foregoing  cir- 
culars, a few  general  deductions  may  safely  be  drawn  relative  to 


16 


the  probable  future  trend  of  beef  production  in  the  corn-growing 
section  of  the  United  States. 

The  undeveloped  state  of  cattle  production  in  proportion  to 
the  population  and  the  area  of  the  United  States  as  compared 
with  the  condition  of  the  industry  in  older  countries  justifies  the 
> expectation  of  an  ultimate  extension  and  development  of  cattle 
raising  and  feeding  in  this  country.  Tin  rapid  increase  of  pop- 
ulation and  the  slower  rate  of  increase  in  the  number  of  cattle 
have  rendered  the  export  beef  trade  a relatively  insignificant  fac- 
tor; but  with  a large  domestic  demand  in  proportion  to  the 
supply,  and  limited  competition  from  abroad,  the  industry  should 
be  practically  independent  of  foreign  trade.  General  market  con- 
ditions are  now  and  promise  to  remain  favorable  to  the  producer, 
for  he  has  a domestic  market  as  a regular  outlet  and  a foreign 
market  as  an  influential  regulator  of  prices  and  as  an  elastic  con- 
sumer of  surplus. 

The  “passing  of  the  range”  has  not  diminished  the  number 
of  western  cattle  entering  the  markets,  but  the  growing  popula- 
tion  of  the  West  and,  consequently,  the  increased  amount  of  beef 
slaughtered  and  consumed  in  that  section  have  reduced  the  rela- 
tive importance  of  western  cattle  as  a factor  in  corn-belt  markets. 
Further,  corn-fed  beef  cattle,  which  can  be  properly  and  profit- 
ably finished  only  within  a limited  section  of  the  country,  doubt- 
> less  will  continue  in  demand  by  a class  of  trade  in  which  the 
cheaper  grass  beef  of  the  West  cannot  compete. 

Notwithstanding  the  general  subdivision  of  western  ranges 
and  ranches  by  settlers,  the  fact  that  large  areas  of  the  West  and 
Southwest  are  adapted  only  to  grazing  indicates  that  these  sec- 
tions wTill  continue  to  produce  a considerable  number  of  feeding 
cattle.  As  Ireland  with  her  abundance  of  grass  has  grown 
“store”  or  feeding  cattle  for  the  farmers  of  England  and  Scot- 
land for  many  years  and  continues  to  do  so,  similarly  the  grass 
lands  of  our  great  West  and  South  may  reasonably  be  expected 
to  supply  stockers  and  feeders  to  large  markets  of  the  corn  belt 
for  many  years  to  come. 

An  increasing  proportion,  and  eventually  a large  proportion, 
of  the  cattle  matured  in  the  corn  belt,  however,  must  be  reared 
there;  because,  as  explained  in  Circular  164,  the  quality  of  west- 
ern cattle  will  be  adversely  affected  by  an  increased  proportion  of 


cattle  of  the  dairy  type,  and  at  the  same  time  the  development  of 
agriculture  will  facilitate  the  finishing  of  a larger  proportion  of 
feeding  cattle  on  western  farms.  Certain  sections  of  the  corn 
belt,  and  some  farms  in  all  sections,  are  partially  or  wholly  un- 
suited to  grain  growing,  and  these  lands,  in  many  instances,  may 
be  most  profitably  used  for  grazing  purposes. 

With  the  development  of  more  intensive  farming  methods, 
the  introduction  of  corn  silage,  alfalfa,  and  forage  crops  in  gen- 
eral will  tend  to  render  both  cattle  raising  and  feeding  more  prac- 
ticable and  profitable.  Also,  regardless  of  the  price  of  land  or  of 
grain,  a considerable  amount  of  roughage  and  aftermath  remains 
to  be  either  fed  or  wasted  on  every  farm,  and  this  factor  will  con- 
tribute largely  toward  maintaining  beef  production  in  the  corn 
belt. 

Eventually,  manure  will  be  regarded  more  highly  by  corn 
growers  in  the  Middle  West  than  it  is  now.  Long  continued  crop- 
ping without  adequate  rotation  and  fertilization  will  ultimately 
compel  such  attention  to  manure  as  it  now  receives  from  cattle 
feeders,  not  only  in  Great  Britain  and  Continental  Europe,  but 
also  in  certain  parts  of  Virginia,  Pennsylvania,  and  Ohio.  Cattle 
feeding  will  be  found  to  be  one  of  the  most  convenient  and  satis- 
factory means  of  obtaining  this  valuable  fertilizer.  This  factor 
is  of  sufficient  importance  to  be  treated  at  some  length  in  a sub- 
sequent circular. 

Over  against  what  has  been  said  in  the  foregoing  paragraphs, 
it  must  also  be  clearly  understood  that  a remunerative  and  rea- 
sonably stable  market  will  be  indispensable  to  the  further 
development  of  the  beef-cattle  industry.  Farming  in  gen- 
eral. and  stock  raising  in  particular,  must  henceforth  be  recog- 
nized as  a capitalized  business,  the  products  of  which  must  sell 
above  the  cost  of  production  in  order  to  render  the  enterprise 
profitable.  Those  upon  whom  the  cattle  feeder  is  dependent  for  his 
returns  must  consider  the  increasing  cost  of  producing  cattle  un- 
der present  and  future  conditions,  and  pay  prices  commensurate 
therewith.  Unfortunately,  the  cattle  feeder  frequently  has  been 
compelled  to  accept  very  inadequate  returns,  and  seldom  has  his 
profit  been  in  full  proportion  to  his  outlay  if  all  elements  of  cost 
be  figured  at  their  just  value. 

luThe  important  fact  connected  with  the  cattle-raising  in- 
dustry is  a marked  shortage,  the  extent  and  far  reaching  effects 


18 


of  which  the  public  has  by  no  means  fully  realized.  The  con- 
suming public  have  complained  of  the  high  cost  of  meats.  At 
times  they  have  accused  producers  of  securing  too  great  profits 
from  the  business.  There  should  be  no  mistake  or  misunderstand- 
ing. The  present  shortage  is  due  primarily  to  the  fact  that  farmers 
have  found  meat  production,  and  primarily  beef  production,  less 
profitable  than  other  agricultural  enterprises.  Over-production 
and  cheap  meat,  while  possible,  are  extremely  remote.  An 
increased  supply  will  come,  not  as  a result  of  lower  prices,  but 
only  as  a result  of  higher  prices.  Consumers  generally  do  not 
appreciate  the  fact  that  for  a generation  or  more  they  have  been 
able  to  buy  meat  products  at  a price  which  does  not  cover  the  cost 
of  production  under  present-day  conditions.  It  is  obvious  that 
the  conditions  which  have  brought  about  the  increased  cost  of 
meat  products  will  continue  to  operate  even  in  greater  force  in 
the  future  than  in  the  past. 

“The  public  will  ultimately  come  to  understand  that  the  pro- 
ducer must  receive  more  rather  than  less  for  his  product  if  an 
ample  supply  of  meat  is  to  be  assured.  In  the  past  the  price  of 
cattle  has  been  based,  so  far  as  it  has  been  based  upon  anything, 
upon  free  or  cheap  range,  cheap  land  and  labor,  and. cheap  corn. 
Even  the  cattle  feeder  of  the  corn  belt  has  been  guilty  at  times  of 
relying  for  his  profit  upon  sharp  practice  in  buying  feeding  cattle 
for  less  than  the  cost  of  production  when  the  producer,  thru 
drouth  or  misfortune  or  possibly  a lack  of  knowledge,  has  been 
forced  to  sell.  Few,  if  any,  of  these  conditions  surround  the 
industry  today. 

“All  will  readily  agree  that  the  producer  is  entitled  to  a mod- 
est profit  in  cattle  production.  No  business  which  depends  upon 
sharp  practice,  or  upon  depriving  some  necessary  factor  in  the 
trade  from  its  just  proportion  of  the  profits  of  the  industry  can 
long  survive.  It  may  well  be  asked,  What  is  a modest  profit?  In 
the  past,  with  rapidly  changing  conditions,  it  has  been  next  to 
impossible  to  answer  this  question.  Conditions  are  now  likely 
to  be  more  stable;  that  is,  changes  will  be  less  frequent  and  less 
radical.  A business-like  beef  production  which  extends  over 
such  a vast  area  of  country  where  conditions  surrounding  it  are 
so  variable  naturally  presents  a most  difficult  problem.  One 
thing,  however,  is  certain,  and  that  is  that  if  there  is  any  con- 

i Extract  from  an  address  by  Professor  Mumford  before  the  Illinois  State  Farmers’  Institute 
at  Galesburg,  February  18,  1914. 


19 


siderable  increase  in  the  production  of  beef  cattle  in  the  United 
States,  it  will  come  from  the  establishment  of  small  herds  on 
many  farms  rather  than  of  large  herds  on  extensive  areas.  This 
means,  if  it  means  anything,  that  the  price  will  be  fixed  by  the 
cost  of  producing  cattle  on  improved  farms,  so  that  ultimately 
the  producer  will  be  by  far  the  most  important  factor  in  fixing 
the  price  of  beef.  This  does  not  mean  that  producers  will  be  per- 
mitted to  fix  a price  altogether  out  of  proportion  with  the  cost  of 
production,  but  one  entirely  consistent  with  it. 

“Obviously,  beef  will  be  most  extensively  produced  where 
conditions  favor  its  economical  production.  Gan  it  be  denied  that 
any  considerable  area  in  this  or  in  any  other  country  offers  more 
favorable  conditions  for  beef  production  than  the  corn  belt?  If 
not,  then  the  corn  belt  holds  the  key  to  the  solution  of  the  cattle 
situation.  Conditions  surrounding  the  industry  and  the  cost  of 
producing  beef  cattle  in  the  corn  belt,  therefore,  will  likely 
be  a large  factor  in  determining  the  answer  to  the  question  of 
a price  basis  which  will  represent  the  cost  of  production  and  a 
modest  profit.  Fortunately,  nowhere  in  the  country  has  the  cost 
of  production  been  more  carefully  worked  out  or  more  accu- 
rately determined.  The  largest  and  most  advantageous  use  of 
these  data  is  one  of  the  problems  of  the  corn-belt  cattlemen. 

“No  price  basis  can  prevail  which  does  not  represent  the 
greatest  use  of  the  best  methods  in  cattle  production.  The  cattle 
raiser  who  does  not  and  will  not  avail  himself  of  the  most  eco- 
nomical practice  must  be  content  to  accept  lessened  or,  in  many 
instances,  no  profits.  This  means  that  ultimately  he  must  change 
his  ways  or  go  out  of  business. 

“The  resumption  of  cattle  raising  on  many  of  the  smaller 
corn-belt  farms  will  present  problems  of  marketing  which  will 
need  adjustment.  The  producer  of  less  than  a carload  is  now 
distinctly  handicapped,  and  yet  it  has  just  been  predicted  that  the 
bulk  of  the  cattle  in  the  future  will  be  produced  by  men  who  have 
considerably  less  than  a carload  of  cattle  ready  for  market  at  any 
one  time  during  the  year.  There  will  need  to  be  developed,  there- 
fore, some  method  of  marketing  which  gives  to  the  smaller  oper- 
ator substantially  the  same  advantages  enjoyed  by  the  larger 
operators.” 


■ 

' 

, 


Circular  No.  176  October,  1914 

Illinois  Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


PRACTICAL  HELP  ON 
LANDSCAPE  GARDENING 


HOW  TO  GET  ILLUSTRATED  LECTURES,  ADVICE, 
AND  PLANS  FOR  HOME  GROUNDS,  STREETS,  ROADS 
LIBRARY,  SCHOOL  AND  OTHER  PUBLIC  GROUNDS 


By  WILHELM  MILLER 

DIVISION  OF  LANDSCAPE  EXTENSION,  DEPARTMENT  OF  HORTICULTURE 


A characteristic  view  from  an  Illinois  roadside,  showing  some  of  the  most  valuable  local 
color  in  the  “Prairie  state” — the  prairie  crab  apple.  Restoration  of  the  birds,  crab  apples, 
and  hawthorns  is  a favorite  motive  in  the  “Illinois  way  of  roadside  planting.” 


College  of  Agriculture 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

URBANA 


PRACTICAL  HELP  ON  LANDSCAPE 
GARDENING 


By  Wilhelm  Miller 

1.  How  to  Get  a Country  Road  Plan 

One  of  the  best  ways  to  beautify  Illinois  is  to  plant  trees,  shrubs, 
and  vines  native  to  the  state  along  the  roadsides.  One  and  one-half 
miles  were  planted  in  the  “Illinois  way”  during  the  spring  of  1914. 

This  work  is  done  in  full  sympathy  with  the  needs  of  farmers,  en- 
gineers, and  all  other  road  users.  The  requirements  of  the  Illinois 
State  Highway  Commission  will  be  squarely  met.  Practically  all  dif- 
ficulties have  been  overcome.  Open  spaces  are  left  to  permit  the  ro#d 
to  dry  out  and  to  allow  views.  These  grassy  spaces  are  long  enough 
to  be  mowed  by  the  machinery  now  used.  They  also  reduce  the  cost. 
Near  Chicago,  people  have  spent  from  $1200  to  $1500  a mile  for  road- 
sides planted  solidly.  In  the  open  country  the  cost  is  about  $400  to 
$600,  or  about  10  percent  of  the  cost  of  constructing  good,  hard  roads. 

The  road  leading  to  the  cemetery  is  often  the  one  which  all  parties 


1.  Illinois  Roads  as  We  All  Want  Them  to  be 

Good  hard  roads  lined  with  trees  and  shrubs  native  to  Illinois,  like  the  prairie  rose. 
(A  country  road  near  Madison,  Wisconsin,  where  the  native  vegetation  has  been  preserved, 
and  more  of  the  kind  planted.  Photograph  by  C.  N.  Brown.) 


"P^oposep  T^OApsipE.  "PbArsTirse  Heai?  SiptLL,  1 ll 

PlV'ISIOIN  OF  LANP5CAPE  PE51SH 


2.  The  First  Roadside  Plan  Made  in  the  ‘‘Illinois  Way” 

Half  a mile  planted  near  Sidell,  Illinois,  spring  of  1914.  Two  and  a half  miles  have 
been  guaranteed  there,  four  miles  near  Barrington,  etc. 


will  agree  to  improve  first.  Other  favorite  projects  are  the  main  en- 
trances to  a city,  the  roads  to  the  country  club,  and  roads  thru  large 
farms.  In  some  cases,  several  miles  have  been  planted  without  wait- 
ing for  hard  roads.  For  illustrations,  see  cover  and  Figs.  1 and  2. 


APPLICATION  for  road  plan 

Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  University  of  Illinois,  Urbana,  111. 

Will  you  send  a man  to  give  the  illustrated  lecture  on  ‘ ‘ The  Illi- 
nois Way  of  Roadside  Planting,  ’ ’ and  tell  us  how  we  can  get  a plan 
by  state  aid,  thru  the  University  of  Illinois? 

Name 

Address 


2.  How  to  Get  a Plan  for  Your  School  Grounds 

Perhaps  the  surest  way  to  make  Illinois  one  great  garden  is  to  teach 
school  children  to  know,  love,  and  cultivate  the  trees,  shrubs,  vines,  and 
flowers  native  to  Illinois.  For  when  the  children  come  to  make  homes 
of  their  own,  they  will  choose  material  which  is  permanent,  appropri- 
ate, and  characteristic  rather  than  temporary,  gaudy,  and  imitative. 
To  accomplish  such  results,  one  township  high  school  is  planning  for 
an  “Illinois  Arboretum.” 


4 


The  ideal  is  a comprehensive  plan  including  sanitation,  play- 
grounds, and  gardening.  The  phrase  “school  gardening’ ’ now  covers 
three  distinct  ideas : 

1.  An  outdoor  laboratory  for  teaching  horticulture  at  school. 

2.  The  temporary  beautifying  of  back  yards  by  means  of  penny 
packets  of  seed  sold  to  children  at  school. 

3.  The  permanent  decoration  of  the  school  building  and  grounds. 

The  ideal  is  to  give  the  children  a share  in  all  these  activities.  A 

playground  without  a garden,  or  a garden  without  a playground,  is 
less  desirable  than  a good  plan  embodying  both,  part  of  which  you  can 
realize  every  year. 

Ordinarily  we  give  only  informal  advice  to  school  boards  and  rec- 
ommend some  one  else  to  make  the  plan,  as  there  is  no  desire  to  com- 
pete with  landscape  gardeners  or  nurserymen.  Sometimes,  however, 
private  designers  cannot  be  secured,  or  a new  style  must  be  worked 
out,  or  there  is  an  exceptional  opportunity  to  stimulate  a whole  com- 
munity to  do  more  and  better  planting.  In  such  cases  it  may  be  pos- 
sible to  secure  a plan  thru  the  Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  but 
every  application  must  be  approved  by  Professor  J.  C.  Blair,  Head 
of  the  Department  of  Horticulture. 


3.  A New  Way  of  Beautifying  School  Buildings 

Instead  of  putting  shrubbery  against  the  wall  of  a large  building,  place  it  about  ten 
feet  away.  This  arrangement  admits  light  and  air  to  the  basement  windows,  prevents 
dampness,  and  makes  it  easier  to  handle  coal  and  snow.  It  looks  better  because  it 
makes  a broader  foundation,  such  as  a tall  building  requires.  (Normal  School,  Salem, 
Mass.  Harlan  P.  Kelsey,  landscape  architect). 


Even  when  little  land  is  available,  some- 
thing worth  while  can  be  done.  The  sim- 
plest, cheapest,  and  quickest  improvement 
is  foundation  planting.  Shrubs  and  vines 
enough  to  transform  the  front  of  the  build- 
ing may  cost  from  $10  to  $50.  They  will 
mature  in  three  or  four  years  and  often 
create  enough  public  interest  to  secure 
funds  for  a comprehensive  plan,  and  a 
liberal  yearly  appropriation  until  the 
whole  scheme  is  realized.  “The  Illinois 
Way  of  Foundation  Planting”  is  elabor- 
ated in  “Arbor  and  Bird  Days  for  1914,” 
published  by  Hon.  F.  G.  Blair,  State  Super- 
intendent of  Public  Instruction,  Spring- 
field.  This  illustrated  article  has  been 
shown  by  public-spirited  citizens  to  mem- 
bers of  school  boards  and  has  stimulated 
several  requests  for  state  aid  in  planning 
school  grounds.  See  Figs.  3 and  4. 


4.  Salem’s  School  Garden 

Inside  the  foundation  plant- 
ing. Bushes  at  right  are  lilacs. 
Imagine  their  beauty  when  in 
bloom  I Better  than  concrete? 


APPLICATION  FOR  HELP  ON  SCHOOL  GROUNDS 

Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  University  of  Illinois,  Urbana,  111. 

Will  you  send  a man  to  give  the  illustrated  lecture  on  ‘ ‘ The  Il- 
linois Way  of  Planting  School  Grounds?”  If  so,  I will  guarantee 
his  traveling  expenses,  furnish  a lantern  and  operator,  and  get  the 
school  board  to  attend — also  the  citizens  who  would  be  likely  to  give 
financial  aid  to  a unique  and  better  comprehensive  plan,  including 
playgrounds  and  school  gardens. 

Name 

Address 




3.  How  to  Stop  Tree  Butchery 

Every  street  tree  is  worth  $1  a square  inch  in  cross  section  four  feet 
above  ground,  according  to  the  “Parker  standard.”  provided  it  is  a 
permanent  species,  well  located,  and  in  perfect  health.  The  above 
estimate  is  based  on  a town  of  100,000  inhabitants.  In  small  cities  and 
villages  the  rate  is  reduced,  but  the  total  value  is  still  high.  This 
figure  represents  the  “scenic  and  recreative  value”  of  the  trees  to 


6 


the  city.  Money  spent  on  planting  and  maintaining  shade  trees  may 
not  make  such  a spectacular  appeal  as  money  spent  on  the  best  mag- 
azines for  advertising  your  town  as  a desirable  place  to  live,  but  the 
“pulling  power”  of  fine  old  trees  is  a large  and  permanent  item. 
Thus  trees  add  to  the  prosperity  of  your  town  and  the  value  of  your 
property,  to  say  nothing  of  the  added  health,  comfort,  and  beauty. 

Unfortunately,  the  trees  have  to  run  a terrible  gauntlet — tree 
butchers,  damage  by  storms,  gnawing  by  horses,  smoke,  gas,  electric- 


5.  Tree  Butchery 

This  is  against  the  laws  of  Illinois.  It 
has  been  done  everywhere,  but  it  can  be 
prevented  by  having  a shade  tree  com- 
mission or  city  forester,  as  Urbana  does. 


6.  One  Way  to  Prevent  it 

It  is  never  necessary  to  mutilate  trees. 
There  are  eight  different  things  the  wire- 
using companies  can  do.  These  are  shown 
by  lantern  slides  in  the  lecture. 


ity,  underground  pipes,  wires,  amateur  pruners,  insects,  diseases,  and 
people  who  cut  down  trees  for  fuel,  or  thru  ignorance  of  their  value. 

To  solve  all  these  problems  there  seems  to  be  only  one  way,  viz.,  to 
have  a city  forester  or  shade  tree  commissioner.  The  former  is  gen- 
erally a paid  official ; the  latter  is  a public-spirited  citizen  serving  with- 
out pay.  In  Urbana  the  trees  are  under  the  general  supervision  of 
Professor  Hottes.  No  one  can  cut  down,  plant,  or  prune  a tree  with- 
out his  permission,  and  the  city  pays  the  actual  cost  of  pruning,  which 
is  done  under  his  direction.  In  every  community  in  Illinois,  large  or 
small,  there  is  some  public-spirited  citizen  who  believes  in  his  town  suf- 
ficiently to  undertake  this  work.  If  he  does  not  possess  the  technical 
knowledge,  he  can  acquire  it  thru  books  which  the  town  library  will 
secure,  thru  correspondence  with  the  University  of  Illinois,  and  by 


experience.  The  work  can  be  spread  thruout  the  year.  It  can  be 
done  in  such  a way  as  to  prevent  antagonism,  please  the  people  deeply, 
and  build  a better  and  more  beautiful  city.  See  Figs.  5 and  6. 


APPLICATION  FOR  HELP  ON  STREET  TREES 

Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  University  of  Illinois,  Urbana,  111. 

Will  you  send  a man  to  give  the  illustrated  lecture  on  1 ‘ The  Il- 
linois Way  of  Street  Tree  Management? ’ ’ If  so,  I will  guarantee  the 
traveling  expenses,  furnish  a good  lantern  and  operator,  and  get  the 
mayor,  aldermen,  and  park  commissioners  to  attend,  or  any  other 
citizens  who  are  likely  to  help  the  new  movement. 

Name 

Address 


4.  Special  Help  for  Farmers 

The  smallest  rural  communities  can  now  have  an  evening’s  enter- 
tainment with  colored  lantern  slides  of  exceptional  quality,  at  a total 
cost  of  about  five  cents  a person.  If  you  can  supply  the  hall,  light, 
janitor  service,  lantern,  and  operator,  it  is  possible  to  reduce  the  cost 
to  half  a cent  a person. 

The  “ self-explanatory  lecture”  does  away  with  the  traveling  ex- 
penses of  a lecturer.  The  captions  are  printed  directly  under  each 
lantern  slide,  so  that  the  audience  can  read  them.  It  is  much  better, 
however,  for  you  or  some  one  to  read  the  captions,  as  this  is  quicker, 
more  spirited,  and  more  personal.  The  slides  will  be  sent  you  in  time 
to  “rehearse”  the  lecture  alone  or  before  a few  friends,  e.  g.,  the  ed- 
itor of  the  newspaper,  the  school  superintendent,  etc.,  and  you  can 
keep  the  slides  about  ten  days.  See  Fig.  7. 


7.  The  Self-Explanatory  Lecture 

Here  is  the  box  of  lantern  slides  which  farm  communities  may  borrow.  The  ballots 
serve  as  programs  and  every  person  who  signs  one  will  get  a free  copy  of  Circular  170 
(at  the  right)  which  contains  112  illustrations. 


8 


The  subject  is  “The  Illinois  Way  of  Beautifying  the  Farm,”  the 
same  title  as  Circular  170.  The  pictures  are  the  same  as  in  Circular 
170,  but  are  more  impressive,  because  they  are  hand-colored  by  artists. 
This  lecture  is  in  such  demand  that  seven  sets  of  slides  are  almost  con- 
stantly in  use. 

At  the  conclusion  of  your  lecture  you  will  And  that  about  one-fourth 
of  the  families  present  will  sign  a promise  to  do  some  permanent  or- 
namental planting  within  a year.  Can  you  think  of  any  easier,  quicker, 
and  cheaper  way  to  make  permanent  improvements  that  will  add 
greatly  to  the  attractiveness  of  your  community? 


APPLICATION  FOR  THE  SELF-EXPLANATORY  LECTURE 
Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  University  of  Illinois,  Urbana,  111. 

Will  you  send  a box  of  sixty  lantern  slides,  so  that  I may  give 
the  self-explanatory  lecture  called  “The  Illinois  Way  of  Beautify- 
ing the  Farm?”  If  so,  I will  pay  the  express  charges  both  ways 
(about  $1.00)  on  a box  of  sixty  lantern  slides.  I will  furnish  lan- 
tern and  operator  and  pay  for  any  slides  damaged  while  in  my  care. 

Also,  please  send  me  ballots  to  serve  as  programs,  which  our 

people  can  sign,  thus  enabling  them  to  get  Circular  170,  entitled  “The 
Illinois  Way  of  Beautifying  the  Farm.  ’ ’ 

Name 

Address 


5.  Foundation  Planting  for  Farmers 

A new  type  of  county  organization  is  being  formed,  which  promises 
to  accomplish  more  high-grade  ornamental  planting  at  reasonable  cost 
and  with  better  prospects  that  the  shrubs  will  live  than  any  other 
method  with  which  we  are  acquainted. 

A single  township  may  be  taken  as  the  first  unit  for  the  fall  cam- 
paign in  1914.  Every  family  is  given  a chance  to  see  colored  lantern 
slides  of  the  best  Illinois  shrubs  for  foundation  planting.  The  county 
agent  or  advisor  plays  an  important  part,  giving  many  of  the  lectures 
and  sometimes  acting  as  treasurer.  The  organization  plans  to  have  at 
least  one  home  out  of  every  four  planted.  The  buying  is  all  done  thru 
the  treasurer  in  accordance  with  a plan  approved  by  all  the  members. 

The  plan  provides  that  every  farmer  is  to  have  shrubs  and  per- 
ennial flowers  enough  to  decorate  the  entire  front  of  his  house  and  to 
turn  two  corners.  He  gets  twenty-five  shrubs  and  fifty  perennials  at 
a cost  of  forty  cents  a bush,  and  five  cents  for  each  perennial  plant- 
a total  of  $12.50.  This  includes  the  planting  of  all  material,  and  the 
shrubs  are  guaranteed  for  three  years,  which  means  that  any  bush  that 
dies  will  be  replaced.  When  one  remembers  that  nurserymen  often 
charge  seventy-five  cents  a bush  for  furnishing  shrubs  to  individuals 


9 


and  planting  them  (the  only  guarantee  being  that  they  are  true  to 
name  and  will  leaf  out),  the  great  advantages  of  collective  buying  are 
apparent. 

Such  a plan  seems  to  solve  four  great  difficulties  that  have  hitherto 
seemed  insuperable.  As  stated  by  the  farmers  themselves  these  diffi- 
culties are: 

1.  Farmers  have  no  time  for  ornamental  planting  in  spring. 

2.  Farmers  are  so  scattered  that  the  cost  of  transportation  is  too 

high. 

3.  Farmers  do  not  know  what  to  plant,  or  where  and  how. 

4.  Farmers  have  been  victimized  so  often  by  dishonest  nurserymen 
that  they  have  a general  distrust  of  all  nurserymen. 

To  overcome  these  difficulties,  the  first  country  improvement  associa- 
tion proposes:  (1)  to  plant  in  the  fall,  using  materials  that  can  be 

safely  planted  then;  (2)  to  use  a motor  truck  to  deliver  the  bushes  in 
the  autumn,  when  the  roads  are  in  better  condition  than  in  spring; 

(3)  to  educate  the  members  of  the  organization  thru  lantern  slides 
and  literature  furnished  by  the  Division  of  Landscape  Extension ; and 

(4)  to  deal  with  some  nurseryman  of  national  reputation  and  proved 
financial  standing,  so  that  the  guarantee  will  mean  something,  and  to 
have  the  contract  approved  by  legal  and  horticultural  experts.  The 
final  arrangements  made  by  the  first  county  improvement  association 
cannot  be  announced  at  the  time  this  circular  goes  to  press,  nor  is  it 
necessary.  Doubtless  other  good  arrangements  can  be  made  with  va- 
rious nurserymen.  The  important  thing  is  for  farmers  to  realize  the 
great  advantage  of  collective  buying  and  of  doing  as  much  planting 
as  possible  in  the  fall. 

From  the  landscape  gardener’s  point  of  view,  foundation  planting 
is  the  best  thing  for  farmers  to  undertake  first,  because  money  spent 
at  this  point  will  give  greater  results  than  anywhere  else  on  the  farm- 
stead. Foundation  planting  takes  away  the  bare  look  and  transforms 
a house  into  a home.  It  need  not  interfere  with  any  comprehensive 
plan  made  later  and  it  creates  a general  desire  for  such  plans.  It  sat- 
isfies the  universal  demand  for  “ quick  results”  better  than  trees  do. 
since  shrubs  mature  in  three  or  four  years.  To  make  plans  for  these 
foundation  plantings  would  cost  too  much,  but  the  element  of  design 
enters  into  the  scheme  to  the  following  extent:  (1)  The  material  is 

permanent,  appropriate  to  the  country,  and  will  help  to  make  Illinois 
different  from  other  states.  (2)  No  two  places  are  exactly  alike, 
since  each  farmer  can  choose  his  own  varieties.  (3)  The  shrubs  are 
arranged  by  a competent  foreman  who  is  accustomed  to  placing  bushes 
with  or  without  plans. 

From  the  nurseryman’s  point  of  view  it  is  practical  to  plant  and 
guarantee  bushes  only  when  the  homes  are  reasonably  numerous  and 
close  together.  For  example,  a motor  truck  can  go  about  one  hundred 
miles  in  one  day  to  the  scene  of  operations.  A chauffeur  and  two 


10 


experienced  men  can  make  about  six  foundation  plantings  in  a day,  or 
thirty-six  in  a week,  provided  the  homes  are  contained  within  a single 
township,  or  thirty-six  square  miles.  Where  the  average  farm  is  160 
acres,  there  are  about  144  homes.  If  one  family  in  every  four  joins  the 
improvement  association,  there  are  thirty-eight  plantings.  At  $12.50 
each  these  amount  to  $475.  If  $25  is  added  for  the  school,  the  total 
will  reach  $500.  This  is  the  minimum  order  for  a truck  load  of  nurs- 
ery stock.  Individual  orders  may  exceed  $12.50,  and  a farmer  may 
plant  his  entire  farmstead  in  this  way  if  he  desires,  but  no  order  for 
less  than  $12.50  is  received  under  this  plan.  By  cooperation  of  this 
sort  it  is  possible  to  plant  one-fourth  of  the  homes  in  an  entire  county 
in  three  to  five  years,  and  one  county  organization  is  now  planning  to 
win  national  fame  by  being  the  first  county  in  the  United  States  to 
beautify  its  farm  homes  by  concerted  effort. 


APPLICATION  FOR  HELP  ON  COUNTY  PLANTING 

Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  University  of  Illinois,  Urbana,  111. 

Will  you  send  a man  to  give  the  illustrated  lecture  on  “ Founda- 
tion Planting  for  Farmers,  ’ ’ and  tell  us  how  we  can  get  a unique 
scheme  of  county  planting  at  a cost  we  can  well  afford?  If  so, 
I will  pay  traveling  expenses  and  furnish  lantern  and  operator. 

Name 

Address 


The  Division  of  Landscape  Extension  will  aid  all  county  and  town- 
ship organizations  on  request  by  lectures,  literature,  advice,  and  loan 
of  lantern  slides.  This  and  all  other  phases  of  its  work  are,  of  course, 
entirely  educational,  no  commissions  or  profits  of  any  kind  being  re- 
ceived from  materials,  labor,  or  any  other  source. 

6.  How  to  get  Nursery  Stock 

Thousands  of  letters  are  received  from  residents  of  Illinois  asking 
where  ornamental  plants  may  be  secured,  especially  the  ones  pictured 
and  recommended  in  Circular  170.  Some  cheap  and  efficient  means  of 
answering  these  requests  must  be  found,  and  the  best  interests  of 
each  individual  should  be  considered,  without  showing  favoritism  to 
any  commercial  interest.  It  seems  impossible,  however,  to  publish  a 
complete  list  of  even  the  Illinois  nurserymen,  because  of  changes  in 
the  trade,  and  other  difficulties.  An  absolutely  complete  list  would 
hinder,  rather  than  help,  because  it  would  contain  many  addresses  of 
wholesale  dealers  who  will  not  take  retail  business  and  many  small 
growers  who  cultivate  only  a few  varieties.  The  following  list  is 
based  on  the  American  Florist  Company ’s  Directory  which  is  supposed 


11 


to  give  a complete  list  of  all  Illinois  nursery  firms  that  issue  retail 
catalogs.  If  any  Illinois  nurseryman  who  issues  a retail  catalog  has 
been  omitted,  he  will  know  that  it  is  by  accident,  not  design,  and  if 
he  will  notify  us,  correction  will  be  made  in  the  next  edition.  The 
University  of  Illinois  cannot  guarantee  dealings  with  any  nurseryman. 

Illinois  Nurserymen  Who  Issue  Retail  Catalogs 

A.  M.  Augustine,  Normal;  Aurora  Nursery  Co.,  Aurora;  Austin  Nursery 
Co.,  Downers  Grove;  Barnard  Company,  233  W.  Madison  St.,  Chicago;  Beaudry 
Nursery  Co.,  1747  Railway  Exchange  Bldg.,  Chicago;  Bradley  Brothers,  Makanda; 
H.  Burton,  Upper  Alton;  H.  W.  Buckbee,  Rockford;  Corn  Belt  Nursery  & For- 
estry Assn.,  Bloomington;  Cotta  Nursery  Co.,  Freeport;  L.  F.  Dintlemann,  Belle- 
ville; R.  Douglas  & Sons,  Waukegan;  W.  E.  Gallner  & Sons,  Vienna;  J.  W. 
Griesemer,  Hopedale;  S.  E.  Hall,  Cherry  Valley;  D.  Hill  Nursery  Co.,  Dundee; 
Home  Nursery,  La  Fayette;  Joliet  Nurseries,  Joliet;  James  King,  Elmhurst; 
Klehm  & Sons,  Arlington  Heights;  Leesley  Brothers,  N.  Fortieth  and  Peterson 
Avenue,  Chicago;  Maywood  Nursery  Co.,  Maywood;  The  Naperville  Nurseries, 
Naperville;  Swain  Nelson  & Sons,  941  Marquette  Bldg.,  Chicago;  Northfield 
Nursery,  Northfield;  Onarga  Nursery  Co.,  Onarga;  Peterson  Nursery,  30  N.  La 
Salle  St.,  Chicago;  Phoenix  Nursery  Co.,  Bloomington;  Porter  & Son,  Evanston; 
Spaulding  Nursery  & Orchard  Co.,  Springfield;  Vaughan’s  Seed  Store,  31-33  W. 
Randolph  St., Chicago;  B.  J.  Wakeman  & Son,  Chebanse;  C.  H.  Webster,  Centralia; 
The  Geo.  Wittbold  Co.,  739  Buckingham  Place,  Chicago. 

Why  not  try  the  Illinois  nurserymen  first? — Some  of  these  firms 
take  interest  enough  in  the  “Illinois  way”  to  assemble  and  propagate 
more  species  of  Illinois  plants  than  nurseries  outside  the  state  can  be 
expected  to  do,  and  all  should  have  a fair  chance  to  share  in  a move- 
ment for  the  good  of  Illinois.  Again,  nurseries  are  to  a large  extent  lo- 
cal institutions.  No  nurseryman,  at  present,  handles  all  the  woody 
plants  of  Illinois.  Why  not  encourage  your  nearest  nurseryman  by  or- 
dering a dozen  shrubs  of  some  one  kind  that  is  pictured  or  recom- 
mended in  Circular  170? 

Why  not  try  Illinois  species  first ? — We  do  not  ask  anyone  to  deny 
himself  any  of  the  old-time  favorites  of  foreign  origin,  such  as  garden 
roses,  lilacs,  snowballs,  mock  orange,  and  deutzia,  but  do  you  want  to 
make  foreign  plants  exclusive  or  even  dominant?  Don’t  you  prefer, 
at  least  in  your  front  yard,  to  help  make  Illinois  look  different  from 
every  other  state? 

The  following  catalogs,  so  far  as  we  know,  offer  the  greatest  variety 
of  shrubs  and  vines  native  to  Illinois : Swain  Nelson  and  Company, 
Chicago,  51  kinds ; A.  M.  Augustine  and  Company,  Normal,  45  kinds ; 
Leesley  Brothers,  40th  and  Peterson  avenue,  Chicago,  40  kinds ; Wm. 
A.  Peterson,  164  La  Salle  street,  Chicago,  30  kinds.  One  of  these 
catalogs  has  all  the  species  native  to  Illinois  marked  by  a star.  All 
nurseries  have  some  species  native  to  Illinois  and  many  have  promised 
to  offer  more  species  in  greater  quantity  in  the  fall  of  1914. 

Neighborhood  organizations  and  individuals  can  get  their  plantings 
insured  against  failure  at  reasonable  cost.  For  example,  on  orders 


12 


amounting  to  $200,  one  nursery  firm  will  furnish,  plant,  and  guaran- 
tee for  three  years  shrubs  and  vines  at  forty  cents  each,  provided  or- 
ders are  given  thru  one  person  and  no  order  amounts  to  less  than  $10. 

The  Division  of  Landscape  Extension  will  be  glad  to  cooperate  with 
every  nurseryman  who  wishes  to  handle  more  plants  native  to  Illinois. 

7.  How  to  Plan  Your  Home  Grounds 

One  of  the  largest  free  publications  on  landscape  gardening  ever 
issued  is  Circular  170,  “The  Illinois  Way  of  Beautifying  the  Farm.’' 
(See  Fig.  7.)  Altho  written  primarily  for  farmers,  it  contains 
many  suggestions  for  dwellers  in  cities,  suburbs,  and  villages.  It  has 
112  illustrations,  which  serve  to  give  this  circular  a decorative  as  well 
as  a practical  interest.  These  pictures  are  mostly  in  pairs,  contrast- 
ing commonplace  with  better  ways  of  planting  home  grounds.  Some 
of  the  topics  discussed  are : 

The  ‘ ‘ Illinois  way  ’ ’ of  farm  architecture. 

How  to  screen  unsightly  objects  the  year  round. 

Why  shrubbery  borders  are  better  than  hedges  or  beds. 

The  value  of  a background  for  your  farmhouse. 

How  to  make  flat  prairie  interesting. 

How  to  make  your  place  look  1 1 different.  ’ ’ 

Every  tree  worth  $1  a square  inch. 

Bird  gardens  for  Illinois  farmers. 

The  1 ‘ Illinois  way  ’ ’ of  planting  school  grounds. 

The  circular  also  explains  why  permanent  planting  adds  much  more 
to  the  value  of  property  than  temporary  planting;  why  bushes  and 
vines  planted  against  the  foundations  of  the  house  are  more  effective 
than  flower  beds  in  the  lawn ; why  the  native  materials  of  every  state 
are  preferable  to  foreign  and  artificial  varieties;  how  to  frame  the 
view  to  and  from  every  house ; how  to  save  coal  by  planting  wind- 
breaks ; and  how  to  make  a flower  garden  that  is  really  adapted  to 
our  climate,  soil,  labor  conditions,  and  life,  instead  of  copying  some- 
thing Eastern,  English,  or  Italian. 


APPLICATION  FOR  A FREE  COPY  OF  CIRCULAR  170 
Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  University  of  Illinois,  Urbana,  111. 

Please  send  me  a copy  of  Circular  170,  entitled  “The  Illinois 
Way  of  Beautifying  the  Farm.”  I promise  to  do  some  permanent 
ornamental  planting  within  a year. 

Name 

Address 


13 


Lists  are  given  of  the  best  shrubs  for  the  shady  side  of  the  house ; for 
feeding  the  birds  the  year  round ; for  light  and  sandy  soils ; for  high 
foundations;  for  the  prevention  of  cutting  across  lots,  etc.  Also  the 
permanent  vines  are  arranged  according  to  their  season  of  bloom. 

To  prevent  waste  of  this  expensive  publication  it  is  requested  that 
everyone  sign  a promise  like  the  above  application. 

8.  Free  “Ballots”  to  Organizations 

You  can  get  a copy  of  Circular  170,  “The  Illinois  Way  of  Beauti- 
fying the  Farm,”  for  your  friends  and  for  every  member  of  any  or- 
ganization in  which  you  are  interested,  provided  they  are  willing  to 
sign  an  “Australian  Ballot  for  Illinois  People,”  which  is  really  a 
promise  to  do  some  permanent  ornamental  planting  within  a year. 
A reduced  facsimile  of  this  ballot  is  shown  in  Fig.  7.  These  ballots 
are  sent  free  to  any  organization  in  Illinois.  A package  of  250  ballots 
can  be  sent  by  express  collect  to  any  point  in  Illinois  for  about  twenty- 
five  cents.  Thousands  of  them  have  been  distributed  at  little  or  no  cost 
by  women’s  clubs  and  chambers  of  commerce  at  their  regular  meet- 
ings. Banks  hand  them  out  to  depositors.  Farmers’  organizations 
are  mailing  them  to  their  members.  Schools  use  large  quantities. 
Mine  and  factory  owners  have  joined  in  the  movement.  These  ballots 
are  effective  at  any  season — not  merely  in  the  spring  and  fall. 


APPLICATION  FOR  BALLOTS  IN  QUANTITY 

Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  University  of  Illinois,  Urbana,  111. 

Please  send  me  ballots  by  express  collect  and  I will  distri- 

bute them  to  members  of  the  organization  named  belowT,  and  to  my 
friends,  explaining  how  they  can  get  free  copies  of  Circular  170  by 
signing  this  ballot. 

Name 

Organization 

Address 


9.  How  to  Get  Your  Front  Yard  Planted 

You  can  add  about  $500  to  the  value  of  your  lot  in  four  years  by 
cooperating  with  your  neighbors  for  three  to  five  blocks  in  getting  a 
street  plan.  See  Fig.  8.  The  plan  generally  provides  for: 

1.  A uniform,  permanent  kind  of  tree  at  uniform  distances. 

2.  Foundation  planting  for  every  home. 

3.  Connecting  shrubbery  to  make  the  street  a park. 

4.  Different  color  scheme  for  every  street. 


14 


5.  Every  yard  different  from  every  other. 

Every  family  can  make  changes  in  the  plan  before  it  is  accepted. 
The  cost  is  always  within  the  means  of  the  property  owners,  e.  g.,  $10 
to  $20  for  a 50-foot  lot,  or  20  to  40  cents  a front  foot. 

After  your  neighbors  have  had  the  scheme  explained  to  them,  you 
will  find  it  easy  to  get  nine-tenths  of  the  property  owners  to  join  an 
organization.  The  minority  will  gradually  convert  itself.  Sometimes 
the  members  specify  the  amount  they  are  willing  to  spend,  and  agree  to 
have  their  temporary,  misplaced,  or  diseased  trees  cut  down  when  rec- 
ommended. 


APPLICATION  FOR  NEIGHBORHOOD  HELP 

Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  University  of  Illinois,  Urbana,  111. 

Will  you  send  some  one  to  give  the  illustrated  lecture  on  1 1 The 
Illinois  Way  of  Neighborhood  Planting”  and  explain  how  we  can  get 
a street  plan  by  stats  aid?  If  so,  I will  guarantee  the  traveling  ex- 
penses of  the  lecturer,  and  furnish  a good  lantern  and  operator. 

Name 

Address 


10.  How  to  Get  Our  Best  Popular  Lecture 

Our  best  introductory  lecture  is  ‘‘The  Illinois  Way  of  Landscape 
Gardening.”  To  this  title  you  may  add  “adapted  to ,”  in- 

serting the  name  of  your  community,  as  this  lecture  is  never  given 
twice  alike,  but  the  illustrations  used  are  those  best  adapted  to  each 
particular  community  as  determined  by  our  representative  after  per- 
sonal investigation. 


Outline  of  Lecture 

1.  The  money  value  of  beauty. — Signed  stories  of  big  profits  made  by  plant- 
ing in  the  1 1 Illinois  way.  ’ 1 

2.  The  Prairie  school  of  artists. — How  the  middle  West  has  produced  the  first 
genuine  American  style  in  all  the  fine  arts — The  leaders,  their  fundamental  idea, 
and  their  masterpieces. 

3.  How  to  malce  your  state  unique. — The  Illinois  way  of  landscape  gardening 
will  make  the  “ Prairie  state”  different  from  any  other  in  the  union — The  most 
inspiring  examples — The  best  “ repeaters  of  the  prairie.” 

4.  How  to  malce  your  town  unique. — A city  or  county  planting  motive  based 
upon  the  trees,  shrubs,  vines,  and  perennial  flowers  adapted  to  your  soil  and 
conditions  by  ages  of  experiment  on  the  part  of  nature. 

5.  How  to  malce  your  street  unique. — A different  color  scheme  for  every  street 
in  town — Four  crops  of  beauty,  or  one  big  show  of  color  for  each  season. 

6.  How  to  make  your  home  unique. — Every  front  yard  a different  set  of  bushes 
and  vines  and  a different  arrangement,  but  all  contributing  to  the  street,  town,  and 
state  style. 


15 


8.  A Street  Plan  Made  in  the  “Illinois  Way” 

This  simplified  plan  suggests  what  neighborhood  associations  can  get  by  cooperating 
with  the  University  of  Illinois.  The  detailed  plan  shows  where  every  bush  is  to  be  planted, 
and  gives  both  the  common  and  nursery  names  of  all  planting  material.  Here  it  is  possible 
to  show  only  the  outlines  of  foundation  planting  and  connecting  shrubbery.  (Portion  of 
plan  made  for  La  Salle,  111.  Proposed  trees  shown  by  X.) 


7.  Can  your  community  get  international  fame? — Can  your  city,  village,  or 
county  be  the  first  to  undertake  some  new  scheme  of  beautification  or  city  plan- 
ning? Its  advertising  value  and  cost — How  many  new  residents  will  it  bring,  and 
how  much  will  it  increase  the  value  of  your  property? 

8.  Your  greatest  opportunity. — What  you  can  do  now  to  make  the  biggest  im- 
provement in  the  appearance  of  your  community,  in  the  shortest  time,  and  at  the 
least  cost — Whether  you  can  get  state  aid  and  on  what  terms. 

9.  How  to  plant  your  home  grounds. — Practical,  specific  help  on  your  own  in 
dividual  problem — What,  where,  and  how  to  plant. 


How  the  lecture  is  adapted  to  your  conditions. — Our  representative 
will  try  to  spend  a whole  day  with  you.  He  carries  about  600  slides, 
and  is  prepared  to  illustrate  many  conditions  that  he  finds.  No  im- 
provement is  recommended  in  the  lecture  that  is  not  endorsed  by  the 
local  committee. 

To  reduce  expenses  and  save  time  it  is  necessary  to  group  the  lec- 
tures— not  scatter  them  over  the  whole  state.  This  lecture  will  draw 
and  hold  thousands,  if  properly  advertised.  Such  personal  service  can 
be  given  to  few  communities  during  1915  where  an  audience  of  300  or 
more  cannot  be  guaranteed,  unless  there  is  some  reasonable  assurance 


16 


that  funds  are  available  for  some  important  public  improvement  con- 
nected with  landscape  gardening. 

Some  net  results. — This  lecture  was  given  in  twenty-minute  form  in 
Peoria  before  2600  business  men  and  resulted  in  750  signed  promises 
to  do  some  permanent  planting  within  a year. 

The  citizens  invited  the  Division  of  Landscape  Extension  to  assist  in 
a week’s  gardening  revival,  as  a result  of  whidh  over  $10,000  were 
spent  on  permanent  planting  in  the  spring  of  1914.  One  landscape 
gardener  made  plans  for  improvements  costing  $4000,  of  which  $2500 
were  spent  within  a few  weeks. 


APPLICATION  FOR  OUR  BEST  POPULAR  LECTURE 

Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  University  of  Illinois,  Urbana,  111. 

Will  you  send  a man  to  give  the  illustrated  lecture,  ‘ ‘ The  Illi- 
nois Way  of  Landscape  Gardening,  ” adapted  to ? 

If  so,  I will  guarantee  traveling  expenses  and  furnish  lantern  and  op- 
erator. We  will  advertise  the  lecture  thoroly  and  believe  we  can  fill 

a hall  with  a seating  capacity  of . 

A committee  representing  the  commercial  and  women’s  clubs  and 
city  government  will  meet  you  and  take  you  quickly  over  our  town  to 
see  w7hat  you  can  do  for  us. 

Name 

Organization 

Address 


Acknowledgments 

Cover  and  Fig.  7 by  A.  G.  Eldredge;  Fig.  1 by  C.  N.  Brown;  2 and  6 by 
F.  A.  Aust;  3 and  4 by  Robb;  5 by  L.  E.  Foglesong;  8 by  F.  A.  Aust  and 
L.  E.  Foglesong. 

Organization  of  the  Division  of  Landscape  Extension 

Eugene  Davenport,  M.  Agr.,  LL.D.,  Dean  of  the  College  of  Agriculture,  Univer- 
sity of  Illinois  and  Director  of  the  Illinois  Agricultural  Experiment  Station. 

Joseph  Cullen  Blair,  M.S.A.,  Dead  of  the  Department  of  Horticulture. 

Wilhelm  Miller,  Ph.D.,  Assistant  Professor  of  Landscape  Horticulture.  In 
charge  of  the  Division  of  Landscape  Extension. 

Franz  August  Aust,  M.S.,  Assistant  in  Landscape  Design. 

Herbert  Wardwell  Blaney,  M.L.A.,  Assistant  in  Landscape  Extension. 

John  Raymond  Van  Kleek,  M.L.D.,  Assistant  in  Landscape  Extension. 

Edwin  Deal,  B.S.,  Half-time  Assistant  in  Landscape  Extension. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


CIRCULAR  No.  177 


THE  RELATION  BETWEEN  YIELDS  AND  PRICES 

By  E.  Davenport 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  OCTOBER,  1914 


The  State  Bankers  Association  has  furnished  the  Experiment  Station,  thru 
the  different  banks,  with  a list  of  names  of  progressive  farmers  of  the  state, 
and  has  asked  that  publications  of  special  interest  be  sent  to  their  addresses 
from  time  to  time.  Responsive  to  this  request  this  circular  is  issued  and  is 
being  sent  not  only  to  the  names  furnished  by  the  Bankers  Association  but 
also  to  the  regular  mailing  list  of  the  Experiment  Station.  If  parties  to  whom 
this  circular  is  sent  care  to  receive  the  regular  publications  of  the  Experiment 
Station  and  will  notify  the  Director  to  that  effect,  their  names  will  be  added 
to  the  regular  mailing  list. 

This  circular  is  issued  to  call  attention  to  certain  financial  aspects  fre- 
quently overlooked  in  discussions  pertaining  to  an  improved  agriculture.  Tt  is 
designed  to  be  studied  rather  than  hastily  read. 


THE  EELATION  BETWEEN  YIELDS  AND  PRICES 

By-E.  Davenport,  Director 


Introduction 

The  following  points  are  generally  assumed  without  argument  by 
writers  and  speakers  discussing  agriculture : 

1.  That  large  yields  are  always  profitable  and  that  the  best 
farmer  is  the  one  who  raises  the  most  per  acre. 

2.  That  large  yields  are  a natural  antidote  for  the  high  cost 
of  living. 

3.  That  when,  prices  are  low  the  farmer  should  raise  his  yields 
to  protect  his  income. 

4.  That  everybody  is  suffering  because  of  the  “slipshod  and 
wasteful  methods  of  the  American  farmer.” 

5.  That  we  should  now  copy  the  intensive  methods  of  older 
countries  and  that  more  capital  is  needed  for  the  best  results. 

As  a matter  of  fact,  there  is  truth  in  all  these  propositions,  but 
it  is  mixed  with  an  amount  of  error  and  of  misconception  concerning 
the  economic  laws  governing  agricultural  production  that  is  dangerous 
both  to  the  farmer  and  to  the  consumer. 

Cheap  Food  and  Low  Yields 

We  are  just  emerging  from  a pioneer  agriculture,  in  which  land 
had  little  value,  because  it  was  abundant,  and  labor  was  the  principal 
element  in  the  cost  of  production.  If  the  American  farmer  has  been 
wasteful  of  fertility  it  is  because  he  has  had  it  to  waste,  but  he  has 
been  exceedingly  economical  of  labor,  which  was  costly,  and  has  pro- 
duced the  cheapest  food  the  world  has  ever  eaten,  or  ever  will  eat. 
tho  the  yields  per  acre  have  been  little  more  than  half  those  of  older 
countries.  Our  question  has  been  not  how  much  per  acre  but  how 
much  per  man,  and  in  this  the  American  farmer  has  been  right  even 
tho  his  average  yields  have  been  low. 

We  are,  however,  approaching  old-country  conditions.  Land  is 
growing  scarce,  and  therefore  costly,  so  that  elements  other  than 


3 


4 


labor  have  begun  to  enter  into  the  cost  of  production  and  food  is 

necessarily  higher. 

Under  pioneer  conditions  the  highest  yields  have  been  the  most 
profitable  because  they  were  the  result,  not  of  expensive  methods  of 
farming,  but  of  especially  rich  spots  of  land  or  of  favorable  seasons, 
costing  nothing  extra  beyond  the  increased  expense  of  harvesting. 
It  is  still  true  that  high  yields  are  profitable  if  they  can  he  cheaply 
produced , hut  the  general  principle  is ' that  the  higher  the  yield  the 
greater  the  cost,  not  only  per  acre,  hut  per  hushel. 

This  natural  operation  of  the  economic  law  of  diminishing  returns 
in  farming  is  best  illustrated  by  an  experiment  begun  many  years  ago 
by  Lawes  and  Gilbert  at  Rothamsted,  England,  the  oldest  experiment 
station  in  the  world.  They  applied,  every  year  for  twelve  years,  dif- 
ferent amounts  of  complete  fertilizer  to  adjoining  fields  of  wheat, 
with  the  following  results : 


Fertilizer  applied1 

Av.  12  yrs. 

Increase 

Increase 
per  200  lbs. 

None 
200  lbs. 

18.4  bu. 

28.4  bu. 

10.0  bu. 

10.0  bu. 

400  lbs. 

36.4  bu. 

18.0  bu. 

8.0  bu. 

600  lbs. 

38.0  bu. 

19.6  bu. 

1.6  bu. 

By  this  we  see  (fourth  column)  that  as  an  average  of  the  twelve 
years  the  first  200  pounds  of  fertilizer  returned  10  bushels,  but  that 
a second  200  pounds  increased  the  yield  only  8 bushels  above  the 
first,  and  that  a third  200  pounds  returned  but  a little  over  a bushel 
and  a half  above  the  double  dose,  showing  that  increased  outlay  is 
not  always  followed  by  correspondingly  increased  yields. 

The  experiment  was  continued,  and  at  the  end  of  fifty-two  years 


the  results  were  as  follows: 

Fertilizer  applied1  Av.  52  yrs. 

Increase 

Increase 
per  200  lbs. 

None 
200  lbs. 

14.8  bu. 

23.9  bu. 

9.1  bu. 

9.1  bu. 

400  lbs. 

32.8  bu. 

18.0  bu. 

8.9  bu. 

600  lbs. 

37-i  bu. 

22.3  bu. 

4-3  bu. 

These  figures  for  half  a century  show  the  same  principle  of 
diminishing  returns  in  a modified  form.  Due  to  soil  exhaustion,  the 


Nitrogenous  fertilizer  with  abundance  of  mixed  minerals. 


5 


yields  from  the  unfertilized  land  decreased  during  the  fifty-two  years. 
On  account  of  a few  bad  seasons,  the  average  effect  of  the  first  dose 
(200  pounds)  was  slightly  decreased.  Owing  to  the  accumulation  of 
residues  of  fertilizer,  the  effects  of  the  second  and  third  doses  were 
relatively  larger  than  for  the  twelve-year  period,  tho  subject  to  the 
same  law  of  diminishing  returns.  That  is  to  say,  the  last  dose  of 
fertilizer  was  less  than  half  as  effective  as  the  first;  or,  what  is  the 
same  thing,  the  last  increment  of  increase  cost  more  than  twice  as 
much  per  bushel  as  the  first. 

Prices  and  Yield 

In  the  more  intensified  agriculture  that  is  just  ahead  of  us,  the 
question  is,  therefore,  not  how  much  the  farmer  can  produce  per  acre, 
but  how  much  he  can  afford  to  produce.  His  yield  must  depend,  not 
mainly  upon  his  knowledge  of  production,  but  upon  the  price  of 
the  product. 

For  example,  in  the  tables  quoted,  each  200  pounds  of  fertilizer 
cost  $7.50.  With  wheat  at  a dollar  a bushel,  a little  computation  will 
show  that  both  the  single  and  the  double  applications  would  pay, 
but  that  the  triple  application  would  swallow  all  the  profits  and  more. 
At  eighty  cents  a bushel,  only  the  first  dose  would  make  money ; while 
at  fifty  cents  a bushel,  none  of  the  treatments  would  pay,  and  both 
the  farmer  and  the  public  would  have  to  be  contented  with  the  lower 
yields  from  untreated  land  until  such  time  as  the  consumer  was 
willing  to  pay  a higher  price  for  his  food.  In  this  way  is  yield  de- 
pendent upon  price,  and  it  is  the  natural  way  in  which  supply  adjusts 
itself  to  demand  as  expressed  in  price. 

Of  the  same  tenor  is  the  experience  of  the  University,  which  is 
producing  corn  yields  varying  from  26  bushels  per  acre  on  continu- 
ously unfertilized  land,  to  an  average  of  93  and  a maximum  of  120 
bushels  per  acre  on  land  which  is  excessively  fertilized.  It  is  making 
no  money  on  either  extreme:  in  the  one,  because  the  yield -is  not  suffi- 
cient to  pay  the  labor ; in  the  other,  because  the  fertilizers  are  so  cost- 
ly as  to  swallow  all  the  profits.  The  problem  of  the  farmer,  therefore, 
is  to  determine  at  what  point  between  these  extreme  yields  he  must 
aim  to  fix  his  average  yield,  and  in  determining  this  point  he  must 
take  into  consideration  the  value  of  his  land,  the  cost  of  labor,  the 
cost  of  fertilizer,  and  the  probable  price  he  will  receive  for  his  product. 


6 


From  this  we  see  the  impossibility  of  “doubling  yields  without 
increased  expense,”  and  also  that  when  prices  drop,  the  income  of 
even  the  best  farmers  must  decline,  for  extreme  yields  are  profitable 
only  with  high  prices.  It  must  be  clear  that  we  cannot  recklessly 
increase  the  yield  per  acre. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  cannot  continue  the  old-time  wasteful 
methods  of  soil  exhaustion,  cheap  and  effective  tho  they  were  in  their 
day,  because  they  are  resulting  in  decreasing  yields  in  the  face  of 
increasing  demands.  If  our  declining  yields,  due  to  soil  exhaustion, 
are  to  be  arrested  and  turned  into  even  a slight  increase  to  meet  the 
growing  demands,  it  is  clear  that  new  methods  must  be  employed, 
but  the  object  must  be  a moderate  increase  in  yield  by  economic 
methods  and  not  extreme  yields,  which  are  bound  to  result  in  loss 
to  the  farmer  or  in  prohibitive  prices  for  food,  or  both. 

Our  farming  is  now  in  a transition  stage  between  the  “extensive 
agriculture”  of  the  pioneer,  in  which  fertility  is  disregarded  and  there 
is  no  investment  but  labor,  and  the  “intensive  agriculture”  of  old  and 
densely  populated  countries,  in  which  the  main  question  is  yield  per 
acre,  resulting  either  in  high  cost  of  food  or  in  poorly  paid  labor. 
(China  produces  the  most  per  acre  but  pays  its  laborers  the  least.) 

Our  present  yields  are  below  what  the  climate  and  the  general 
situation  ought  to  produce,  owing  mainly  to  certain  adverse  conditions 
that  can  be  cheaply  and  easily  corrected,  and  money  put  into  this 
channel  will  well  repay  the  investment  because  it  will  increase  the 
yield  without  being  subject  to  the  law  of  diminishing  returns.  This 
is  where  our  present  duty  and  opportunity  lie  in  establishing  the 
foundations  of  a permanent  agriculture.  It  must  be  remembered  that 
we  have  not  yet  reached  the  intensive  stage , where  it  will  pay 
either  the  producer  or  the  consumer  to  attempt  maximum  yields  on 
American  land. 


Rational  Procedure 

In  this  transitional  stage,  in  which  our  yields  are  kept  down  by 
certain  adverse  conditions,  the  first  step  in  a rational  procedure  is  the 
correction  of  these  conditions  by  relatively  inexpensive  methods,  such 
as  the  use  of  lime  to  correct  acidity,  the  application  of  cheap  forms 
of  phosphorus  or  of  potassium  to  balance  fertility,  keeping  nitrogen 
always  the  limiting  element,  a better  adjustment  of  crops  to  soil  and 


7 


to  locality,  and  the  organization  of  more  economic  systems  of  farming, 
with  special  attention  to  live  stock,  the  distribution  of  labor,  and  the 
investment  of  capital.  All  the  advice  given  out  by  the  University 
of  Illinois  at  this  juncture  is  based  upon  this  principle,  because  invests 
ments  of  this  character,  whether  of  labor  or  of  capital,  are  certain  to 
increase  the  yield  with  relatively  slight  expense.  Having  done  what 
we  can  in  this  way,  we  may  await  with  confidence  the  intensive  stage, 
the  coming  of  which  will  be  characterized  by  a permanent  rise  in  prices. 

The  Handicap  of  the  Small  Farmer 

The  greatest  hazard  in  farming  is  the  season,  against  which  im- 
proved methods  are  only  a partial  protection.  The  farmer  with  little 
or  no  capital  must  confine  himself  to  practices  that  will  pay  every 
year,  while  the  man  with  considerable  means  is  free  to  follow  those 
more  expensive  methods  which  pay  best  in  the  long  run,  even  tho  an 
adverse  season  now  and  then  might  show  a loss.  This  lack  of  capital 
cannot  be  remedied  by  short-time  loans  to  the  small  farmer,  nor  by 
loans  of  any  kind  to  the  farmer  whose  yields  are  limited  by  bad  culti- 
vation or  to  the  one  incapable  of  managing  his  business  upon  the 
more  complex  and,  to  him,  more  dangerous  basis  that  will  be  at  once 
established  when  he  attempts  to  increase  his  yield  by  a larger  use 
of  capital. 

Farming  on  Credit 

It  is  commonly  said  that  not  enough  floating  capital  is  invested 
upon  American  farms,  and  it  is  doubtless  true,  but  it  must  be  remem- 
bered, both  in  extending  credit  and  in  making  loans,  that  the  American 
farmer  has  had  little  experience  in  handling  capital.  Manifestly, 
therefore,  when  he  borrows,  both  he  and  the  lender  must  be  satisfied 
that  the  loan  will  be  judiciously  used,  or  it  may  result  disastrously. 

The  student  of  agriculture  cannot  fail  to  see  the  danger  of  over- 
capitalization  in  attempts  to  secure  abnormally  high  yields,  a danger 
which  increases  as  the  practice  spreads,  for  altho  one  man  may  safely 
increase  his  yields  without  depressing  the  price,  if  all  farmers  were 
to  follow  his  example  the  price  would  drop  and  all  would  lose  money. 
Under  this  principle  a few  farmers  will  always  be  practicing  methods 
not  practicable  for  the  mass.  By  this  we  see  that  in  the  long  run  the 
chief  results  of  better  farming  will  be  realized  by  the  consumer  rather 


8 


than  by  the  farmer.  All  attempts  to  hold  down  production  with  the 
purpose  of  raising  the  price  are  as  unavailing  as  they  are  unwarranted. 
The  world  wants  food,  and  the  principles  herein  presented  are  the 
ones  that  will  guarantee  its  cheapest  production. 

Conclusion 

It  is  relatively  safe,  therefore,  to  invest  capital  freely  upon  the 
farm  for  the  sake  of  correcting  abnormal  conditions  and  raising  the 
yield  to  the  normal,  but  beyond  that  point  it  will  pay  only  when  prices 
rise.  As  we  approach  this  point  by  reason  of  increased  population 
with  its  increased  demands,  either  the  cost  of  food  must  rise  or  labor 
be  greatly  degraded,  else  the  farmer  cannot  afford  to  produce  the 
increase  needed.  As  population  increases,  therefore,  but  one  alterna,- 
tive  will  present  itself — each  human  unit  must  become  more  efficient 
in  production,  or  it  must  deny  itself  much  of  what  is  now  enjoyed. 

This  circular  is  issued  not  as  an  argument  for  poor  farming  nor 
for  the  continuance  of  old-time  methods , but  to  point  out  that  we  are 
not  to  step  at  once  and  blindly  into  expensive  forms  of  intensive  agri- 
culture. We  should  ascertain  and  practice  those  relatively  inexpensive 
methods  belonging  to  a transition  stage  that  correct  bad  conditions 
and  thereby  considerably  increase  the  yield  without  seriously  raising 
the  price,  so  that  the  results  may  be  profitable  alike  to  the  farmer  and 
to  the  public  whom  he  serves.  In  this  good  work  there  is  no  danger 
of  doing  too  much. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  JANUARY,  1915 


CIRCULAR  No.  178 


A CRISIS  IN  THE  FOOT  AND  MOUTH  DISEASE 

SITUATION1 

There  are  two  sides  to  every  question  upon  which  men  differ 
honestly,  and  at  present  there  are  differences  of  opinion  between  many 
of  the  cattle  owners  on  one  side  and  the  federal  Bureau  of  Animal 
Industry  and  the  Illinois  State  Live  Stock  Commission  on  the  other 
regarding  the  best  method  of  combating  foot  and  mouth  disease.  The 
Agricultural  Experiment  Station  recognizes  that  this  is  a crisis  and 
feels  that  a clear  statement  of  both  sides  may  aid  the  public  generally 
to  a better  understanding  of  the  present  situation. 

A brief  outline  of  preceding  events  may  serve  as  an  introduction 
to  this  statement.  Spreading  from  a single  point  in  Michigan,  the 
foot  and  mouth  disease  was  distributed  from  New  England  to  Mon- 
tana within  a month,  and  it  was  plain  that  if  not  checked  it  would  reach 
practically  every  herd  in  the  country  within  a short  time. 

The  federal  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry  and  the  various  state  live- 
stock commissions  who  are  charged  with  handling  such  matters  were 
not  organized  to  control  an  outbreak  of  such  magnitude.  At  that  time 
there  were  but  few  men  in  the  United  States  available  as  inspectors 
who  had  ever  seen  a case  of  this  disease.  Under  such  circumstances 
it  might  be  expected  that  mistakes  in  diagnosis  would  be  made.  Start- 

lThe  following  material,  prepared  by  a committee  of  the  Experiment  Station  and  pub- 
lished first  as  a press  bulletin,  is  now  republished  as  a Station  circular  in  order  to  give  it 
greater  publicity. 


in g in  late  October  with  what  seemed  a practicaliy  hopeless  situation, 
the  centers  of  infection  have  been  located  and  removed  until  the 
general  situation  is  now  well  in  hand  and  there  is  little  uncertainty  as 
to  the  outcome  except  in  the  state  of  Illinois.  Here  the  infection  has 
been  heaviest  and  something  over  five  hundred  herds  have  been 
destroyed  in  combating  the  disease.  Of  the  herds  reported  diseased, 
less  than  twenty-five  remained  alive  on  January  12,  in  addition  to  the 
National  Dairy  Show  cattle  held  in  quarantine  for  experimental 
purposes. 

Where  even,  a single  animal  has  been  found  diseased,  the  entire 
herd  has  been  slaughtered,  and  the  federal  authorities  have  agreed  to 
pay  one  half  of  the  appraised  value  of  the  slaughtered  animals,  there 
being  an  understanding,  but  no  legal  provision,  that  the  state  would 
pay  the  other  half.  The  large  financial  loss  incident  to  this  slaughter 
and  the  uncertainty  created  in  the  minds  of  other  cattle  owners  as  to 
the  possibility  of  their  being  the  next  victims  have  created  a very 
panicky  feeling  in  many  communities. 

The  cattle  owners  feel  that  they  have  been  made  to  bear  unneces- 
sary burdens  by  this  program  of  universal  slaughter.  They  point  out 
that  in  many  of  the  herds,  particularly  the  National  Dairy  Show  cattle, 
the  effect  of  the  disease  is  so  slight  as  to  be  hardly  noticeable  to  the 
-casual  observer  and  that  the  death  rate  has  been  extremely  low.  They 
urge  that  a way  be  provided  for  saving  the  cattle,  particularly  in  the 
cases  where  the  herds  represent  the  results  of  years  of  careful  breeding. 

There  is  also  dissatisfaction  on  the  financial  side.  The  appraised 
values,  while  not  seriously  below  the  market  value  of  the  ordinary 
animal,  do  not  cover  the  breeding  value  of  the  animal  or  the  disorganiz- 
ation of  the  farm  business  which  has  resulted  from  the  destruction  of 
the  herds.  The  latter  is  especially  important  upon  the  dairy  farms 
where  the  farm  plan  calls  for  a herd  to  consume  the  forage.  Where 
the  cattle  are  destroyed  they  cannot  be  replaced  under  present  con- 
ditions both  because  the  traffic  in  cattle  is  stopped  and  because  it  would 
be  unwise  to  at  once  restock  the  infected  farms.  Accordingly  the 
crops  cannot  be  consumed  upon  these  farms  as  usual.  Moreover, 
there  is  no  market  for  these  forage  crops  because  of  the  danger  that 
they  may  transmit  the  disease.  As  a result  of  the  loss  of  their  cattle 
and  a market  for  their  crops,  the  affected  dairy  farmers  are  losing 
heavily,  if  not  facing  actual  financial  ruin. 

Neither  does  this  valuation  cover  the  accessory  expense  and 
inconvenience  incident  to  the  destruction  of  the  herds.  In  some 
instances  weeks  have  elapsed  between  the  date  of  diagnosis  and 
slaughter  and  another  long  period  before  the  final  disinfection  of  the 


premises.  During  this  time  a strict  quarantine  has  been  maintained, 
which  has  hampered  the  people  upon  the  farm  and  prevented  them  from 
obtaining  assistance  for  the  necessary  farm  operations.  This  quaran- 
tine has  been  continued  in  a modified  form  long  after  the  final  disin- 
fection. Finally  the  money  promised  by  the  government  has  not  yet 
been  paid,  and  the  state  has  as  yet  had  no  opportunity  to  provide  for 
payment  of  the  other  half. 

However,  the  foot  and  mouth  disease  must  be  recognized  as  one 
of  the  most  costly  animal  scourges.  In  many  herds  in  this  state  the 
disease  has  appeared  in  a mild  form  and  consequently  many  stockmen 
have  not  realized  the  seriousness  of  the  outbreak.  The  fact  is  that 
when  stripped  of  all  exaggeration  it  far  exceeds  either  tuberculosis 
or  contagious  abortion  in  the  havoc  which  it  works  and  the  ease  with 
which  it  is  spread.  It  produces  little  or  no  immunity,  so  that  ravages 
of  the  disease  recur  at  short  intervals.  With  the  present  narrow  mar- 
gin of  profit  in  the  meat  and  milk  business,  the  carrying  of  the  addi- 
tional burden  of  foot  and  mouth  disease  would  be  impossible  without 
a rise  in  the  price  of  both  milk  and  meat.  Accordingly,  if  the  disease 
became  general,  the  burden  of  this  new  state  of  affairs  would  fall  not 
only  upon  the  farmers  but  upon  the  consumers  as  well.  Since  the 
various  elements  of  cost  have  now  forced  meat  to  an  almost  prohibitive 
price,  there  is  reason  to  expect  that  this  added  cost  would  seriously 
cripple,  if  not  practically  destroy,  the  fat-stock  industry  of  this  country. 
There  is  no  question,  therefore,  but  that  it  would  be  good  business 
policy  to  spend  vastly  more  than  the  present  struggle  has  cost  rather 
than  settle  down  to  foot  and  mouth  disease  as  an  added  burden  to  the 
animal  industry  of  the  United  States. 

The  objection  to  quarantine  as  a method  of  combating  the  disease 
is  that  it  is  both  difficult  and  expensive  to  maintain,  especially  since  the 
disease  is  so  extremely  contagious.  Such  a quarantine  is  now  being 
maintained  in  connection  with  the  Dairy  Show  cattle  at  Chicago,  and 
notwithstanding  the  unusual  value  of  the  animals  the  expense  has  been 
so  great  that  it  is  a question  whether  the  owners  would  not  have  been 
better  off  had  they  accepted  the  appraised  value  of  the  cattle  in  the 
regular  way  and  submitted  to  slaughter  at  the  beginning  of  the  out- 
break. On  an  ordinary  dairy  farm  the  expense  of  maintaining  an 
efficient  quarantine,  coupled  with  the  difficulty  in  marketing  the  prod- 
uct, would  make  the  quarantine  method  of  handling  this  disease  more 
expensive  than  the  present  slaughter  method.  The  apparent  recovery 
of  the  Dairy  Show  herd  has  been  so  frequently  referred  to  as  a suc- 
cessful result  of  the  quarantine  method  of  handling  the  disease  that  it 
seems  desirable  to  point  out  that  the  careful  and  rigid  quarantine  main- 


tained  and  the  sanitary  and  professional  care  with  which  the  cattle 
have  been  surrounded  would  be  absolutely  impossible  on  the  average 
farm. 

Even  where  quarantines  are  carefully  conducted  they  become  a 
menace  to  the  surrounding  farms  because  the  infection  can  be  carried 
in  a mechanical  way  by  birds  and  by  hunters,  as  well  as  by  cats,  dogs, 
rats,  mice,  and  rabbits.  The  difficulty  of  maintaining  an  effective  quar- 
antine is  such  that  any  attempt  to  do  so  on  a large  number  of  farms 
would  be  practically  equivalent  to  abandoning  the  effort  to  eradicate 
the  disease. 

The  present  outbreak  of  foot  and  mouth  disease  does  not  differ 
from  those  which  have  preceded  it  in  any  way  except  in  being  origi- 
nally more  widespread  and  consequently  more  difficult  to  suppress. 
The  method  of  procedure  which  is  now  being  employed  is  precisely  that 
which  has  been  successful  in  suppressing  previous  outbreaks,  and  the 
results  thus  far  attained  indicate  that  the  present  outbreak  can  be  con- 
trolled by  this  means. 

Under  such  circumstances  it  seems  the  plain  duty  of  all  who  have 
the  welfare  of  the  live-stock  interests  at  heart  to  unite  in  supporting 
the  efforts  of  the  federal  and  state  authorities  to  eradicate  the  foot  and 
mouth  disease  from  this  country. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  APRIL,  1915 


CIRCULAR  No.  179 


FOUR  APHIDS  INJURIOUS  TO  THE  APPLE 

By  B.  S.  Pickett 
Assistant  Chief  in  Pomology- 

Aphids  infesting  the  apple  buds  appeared  in  serious  numbers 
during  the  present  season  (1915)  in  the  University  orchards,  when  the 
buds  began  to  swell.  They  were  also  observed  in  neighboring  orchards 
and  in  the  experimental  orchards  of  the  Department  at  Olney  and 
Neoga.  In  1914,  apple  aphids  caused  serious  damage  in  certain  coun- 
ties in  Illinois,  and  some  damage  was  reported  from  many  sections  of 
the  state.  With  a view  to  finding  the  extent  of  the  present  season’s 
infestation,  the  writer  telegraphed  to  six  orchardists  in  representative 
parts  of  the  state  for  information  as  to  the  occurrence  of  the  insects. 
The  replies  were  as  follows : 

From  Johnson  county. — Aphis  worse  than  ever  before.  Something  must 
be  done  quickly  or  crop  is  ruined. 

From  Marion  county. — Aphis  situation  much  more  serious  this  morning 
(April  10). 

From  Union  county. — Find  some  aphis  but  not  in  alarming  numbers. 

From  Washington  county. — Do  not  find  any  aphis. 

From  Jersey  county. — Green  aphis  very  bad  on  almost  all  orchards. 

From  Tazewell  and  McLean  counties. — The  aphids  are  very  bad  at  Lilly. 
At  Normal  there  are  some  aphids  on  some  trees. 

The  replies  indicate  a serious  infestation  more  or  less  widely 
spread  over  the  state,  and  the  Department  of  Horticulture  is  therefore 
preparing  this  brief  circular  in  order  to  provide  information  regarding 
the  insects  and  to  suggest  measures  for  their  control. 

Character  of  Injury 

The  aphids  attack  the  opening  buds,  the  young  fruits,  the  growing 
shoots,  and  the  leaves,  sucking  the  plant  juices  from  the  succulent  parts 


by  means  of  long,  very  slender,  tube-like  beaks  which  they  thrust  thru 
the  skins  of  the  affected  organs  into  the  soft  tissues  beneath.  They 
weaken  the  blossom  buds  by  removing  the  sap;  they  dwarf  and  de- 
form the  apples  so  that  varieties  of  ordinary  size  frequently  fail  to 
grow  larger  than  small  crab  apples,  and  the  fruits  have  a puckered 
appearance  about  the  calyx  end;  they  suck  the  juice  from  the  growing 
shoots,  dwarfing  them;  and  they  cause  the  leaves  to  curl,  and  if  the 
insects  are  present  in  large  numbers,  to  dry  up  and  fall  off.  They  are 
more  injurious  to  the  growth  of  young  trees  than  of  old  trees.  In  old 
trees  their  chief  injuries  are  on  the  fruit. 

Description  of  the  Aphids 

Four  kinds  of  aphids  attack  the  apple,  the  Apple  Aphis  ( Aphis 
pomi  DeG.),  the  Rosy  Apple  Aphis  ( Aphis  sorbi  Kahl.),  the  European 
Grain  Aphis  ( Siphocoryne  avencie  Fab.),  and  the  Clover  Aphis  ( Aphis 
bakeri  Cowen).  All  kinds  are  small,  soft-bodied,  sucking  insects  re- 
producing themselves  with  great  rapidity  in  dry,  warm  weather.  Cold, 
heavy  rains  are  detrimental  to  the  propagation  and  development  of 
the  insects.  The  various  species  differ,  however,  in  their  appearance 
and  habits  in  some  important  respects. 

The  Apple  Aphis  eggs  are  deposited  in  the  fall  on  the  new  shoots 
and  at  the  base  of  the  bud  scales.  The  eggs  are  small  shining  black 
objects  and  are  often  to  be  found  in  great  numbers.  The  eggs  hatch 
about  the  time  the  buds  begin  to  open,  and  the  aphids  may  be  found 
infesting  the  young  shoots,  expanding  leaves,  and  flower  buds.  The 
adults  are  one-twelfth  of  an  inch  long,  and  bright  green  in  color.  This 
species  is  particularly  partial  to  the  young  shoots  and  tender  terminal 
leaves,  but  it  also  deforms  and  stunts  the  fruit  when  present  in  large 
numbers  during  and  immediately  following  the  blooming  period.  The 
Apple  Aphis  lives  on  the  apple  trees  thruout  the  year. 

The  Rosy  Apple  Aphis  eggs  are  deposited  in  the  same  manner  as 
those  of  the  Apple  Aphis  and  hatch  at  the  same  time  in  the  spring. 
The  adults  are  slightly  larger  than  those  of  the  Apple  Aphis,  one- 
tenth  of  an  inch  long,  and  are  variable  in  color,  usually  rosy,  but  some- 
times gray,  purplish,  or  black.  This  species  is  particularly  partial  to 
the  fruit  spurs  and  destructive  to  young  fruits,  tho  it  also  attacks  the 
young  shoots  and  causes  the  leaves  to  curl  as  does  the  Apple  Aphis. 
Unlike  the  Apple  Aphis,  this  species,  after  producing  three  generations 
on  the  apple,  migrates  to  some  unknown  food  plant,  where  it  passes 
the  summer,  returning  to  the  apple  trees  in  the  fall. 

The  European  Grain  Aphis  lays  its  eggs  on  the  apple  in  the  fall 
and  produces  two  generations  on  the  apple  in  the  spring,  after  which 
it  migrates  to  grass  and  grain  crops  for  the  summer,  returning  to  the 
apple  in  the  fall.  The  adults  are  smaller  than  the  previous  species  and 
green  in  color.  It  infests  the  flower  buds  and  blossoms  to  an  even 
greater  extent  than  the  Apple  Aphis  or  the  Rosy  Apple  Aphis,  but. 


owing  to  its  earlier  migration,  it  is  less  injurious  to  the  leaves  and 
young  shoots. 

The  Clover  Aphis  lays  its  eggs  in  the  fall  on  the  shoots  of  the 
apple.  The  eggs  hatch  a week  or  more  before  the  Apple  Aphis.  Most 
of  the  aphids  migrate  to  clover  or  alfalfa  in  June,  tho  a few  appear 
to  remain  on  the  apple  thruout  the  season.  The  adults  are  light  yellow 
or  pink  in  color. 

All  the  species  described  occur  in  Illinois,  and  more  than  one  of 
them  may  be  found  the  same  season  in  the  same  orchard.  In  fact  it 
is  quite  possible  that  all  four  species  are  sometimes  present  in  the  same 
orchard.  Information  as  to  the  relative  seriousness  of  the  different 
species  is,  unfortunately,  incomplete ; orchardists  are  advised  to  observe 
carefully  the  habits  and  appearance  of  these  insects  as  they  have  op- 
portunity in  their  orchards,  in  order  to  identify  the  species  and  to 
determine  whether  or  not  the  particular  species  present  is  causing  suf- 
ficient injury  to  call  for  remedial  measures.  During  the  present  season 
orchardists  should  make  an  immediate  examination  of  their  trees  and 
if  aphids  are  found  in  large  numbers,  should  take  immediate  steps  to 
combat  them.  Growers  whose  orchards  suffered  in  1914  should  be 
especially  prepared  to  fight  these  pests  this  spring. 

Remedial  Measures 

The  species  of  aphids  above  described  are  easily  killed  in  the  adult 
stage  by  certain  contact  sprays.  Winter  applications  of  lime  sulfur 
cannot  be  depended  on  to  destroy  the  eggs.  Poison  sprays  such  as 
arsenate  of  lead  are  not  eaten  by  this  type  of  insect,  and  consequently 
are  ineffective  remedies  for  aphids.  Kerosene  emulsion  is  effective 
but  is  uncertain  in  its  effect  on  the  foliage  of  the  trees.  The  best  avail- 
able sprays  are  the  tobacco  decoctions,  of  which  the  one  most  widely 
in  use  is  “Black  Leaf  40,”  a proprietary  tobacco  extract,  made  by  the 
Kentucky  Tobacco  Products  Company,  Louisville,  Kentucky.  This 
material  is  used  at  the  rate  of  one  gallon  in  one  thousand  gallons  of 
spray.  It  may  be  combined  with  lime  sulfur,  lime  sulfur  arsenate  of 
lead,  Bordeaux,  or  Bordeaux  arsenate  of  lead,  not  with  arsenate  of  lead 
alone. 

The  ideal  time  to  spray  for  these  aphids  is  just  as  soon  as  all  or 
nearly  all  the  eggs  appear  to  have  hatched.  Observations  made  in  the 
University  orchards  this  season  indicate  that  all  the  eggs  hatched  before 
the  blossom  buds  began  to  separate.  After  the  leaves  expand  some- 
what and  the  blossom  buds  separate,  the  aphids  are  provided  with  more 
hiding  places  and  are  more  difficult  to  hit  with  the  spray.  Unfortu- 
nately, spraying  at  this  time  would  require  an  extra  application  in 
addition  to  the  cluster  bud  spray  (made  for  scab,  curculio,  bud  moth, 
spring  canker  worms,  etc.),  and  would  thus  add  seriously  to  the  cost 
of  the  season’s  operations.  Spraying  for  aphids  at  the  time  of  the 
cluster  bud  spray  is,  however,  highly  effective,  and  in  general  it  is 


advised  that  this  method  be  followed.  If,  however,  previous  expen-  I 
ence  has  shown  serious  losses  from  aphids,  or  if  they  are  present  in 
extremely  large  numbers,  the  extra  application  may  be  well  worth 
while. 

Fruit  growers  will  confer  a favor  on  the  Department  of  Horticul-  ! 
ture  if  they  will  write  us  the  results  of  their  observations  on  the 
behavior  of  the  aphids  during  the  present  season.  The  points  on 
which  information  is  particularly  desired  are  the  time  of  appearance 
and  extent  of  the  infestation,  the  color  of  the  adults,  the  duration  of 
the  attack,  the  disappearance  and  reappearance  of  the  aphids,  if  these  I 
occur,  and  the  success  or  failure  of  any  remedial  measures  tried.  Such 
information  will  be  very  helpful  in  determining  the  extent  of  the  need 
for  treatments  and  the  character  of  the  treatments  themselves. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


CIRCULAR  No.  180 


THE  SAN  JOSE  SCALE 


By  PRESSLEY  A.  GLENN,  Chief  Inspector 
State  Entomologist’s  Office 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  APRIL,  1915 


CONTENTS 

PA(iE 

Origin  and  Distribution 5 

Dangerous  Character  of  the  Scale 8 

Life  History  and  Appearance 8 

Food  Plants 15 

Means  of  Distribution 16 

Means  of  Control 17 

Natural  Checks 17 

Preventive  Measures 18 

Artificial  Means  of  Control 19 

The  Lime-Sulphur  Wash  20 

Directions  for  Making 21 

Commercial  Solutions 22 

The  Miscible  Oils 22 

Apparatus  and  Equipment 22 

Miscellaneous  Directions 23 


THE  SAN  JOSE  SCALE 

( Aspidiotus  perniciosus  Comstock) 

By  PRESSLEY  A.  GLENN 

The  San  Jose  scale  is  capable  of  doing  more  injury  in  Illinois 
to  fruit-trees  and  many  other  valuable  trees  and  shrubs  than  any  other 
insect  in  the  state,  and  as  no  general  article  on  the  species  has  ever 
been  printed  in  the  State  Entomologist’s  report  or  in  the  Bulletin  of 
the  Illinois  Agricultural  Experiment  Station,  it  is  believed  that  a com- 
prehensive discussion  of  the  subject,  brought  down  to  date,  will  have 
a considerable  practical  value. 

This  insect  is  so  inconspicuous  that  it  may  easily  be  overlooked ; 
and  its  power  of  multiplication  is  so  great  that,  in  a comparatively 
short  time,  it  may  overspread  the  trunk,  limbs,  twigs,  leaves,  and  even 
the  fruit,  of  the  trees  or  shrubs  which  it  infests,  either  killing  the  plants 
outright,  or  so  injuring  them  that  they  become  worthless.  (See  PI.  I., 
Figs.  1,  2;  PI.  II.,  Fig.  1 ; and  PI.  III.,  Figs.  1,  2.)  It  is  primarily  an 
orchard  pest,  and  is  most  important  in  large  commercial  orchard  dis- 
tricts; but  it  is  also  very  injurious  in  parks  and  private  grounds,  and 
on  lawns  in  cities  and  towns.  Its  control  is  much  more  difficult  in 
towns  than  in  orchard  districts,  because  in  the  former  the  values  in- 
volved in  each  case  are  commonly  too  small  to  make  it  seem  worth 
while  for  the  property  owner  to  go  to  the  trouble  and  expense  of 
getting  the  information  and  equipment  necessary  for  its  destruction; 
while  in  the  latter  the  interests  involved  warrant  the  expenditure  of 
money  and  time  necessary  to  its  effective  control. 

Origin  and  Distribution 

The  San  Jose  scale  is  a native  of  China,  and  it  was  probably 
introduced  into  the  United  States  direct  from  that  country  about  1870, 
on  trees  imported  by  James  Lick,  of  San  Jose,  Cal.,  for  plant- 
ing on  his  private  grounds.  By  1873  it  had  become  destructively 
abundant  in  orchards  surrounding  the  premsies  of  Mr.  Lick,  and  it 
soon  became  known  as  the  San  Jose  scale.  In  1893  it  was  discovered 
at  Charlottesville,  Va.,  and  by  1895  it  had  been  found  at  various 
points  in  thirteen  of  the  eastern  and  central  states.  In  nearly  every 
instance  the  infestation  was  traced  directly  or  indirectly  to  one  or  the 
other  of  two  large  nurseries  in  New  Jersey,  from  which  it  had  been 
sent  out  on  infested  stock. 


6 


This  discovery  created  a general  alarm  thruout  the  country;  and 
state  legislatures  were  asked  to  enact  laws  for  the  prevention  of  the 
further  spread  of  the  scale  and  for  its  eradication  in  localities  already 
known  to  be  infested.  Some  states  responded  promptly,  but  in  others 
practically  nothing  was  done  to  arrest  its  progress ; and  even  in  those 
which  provided  suitable  laws  it  had  already  become  too  firmly  estab- 
lished to  make  its  eradication  possible.  It  was  hoped,  however,  that 
its  further  spread  could  be  prevented  by  a rigid  inspection  of  nurseries, 
but  this  hope  has  been  only  partially  realized.  Its  spread  has  been 
strongly  checked  by  this  means,  however,  and  thousands  of  premises 
are  free  from  it  which  would  otherwise  now  be  infested.  It  has 
nevertheless  spread  to  practically  all  the  fruit-growing  sections  of  the 
United  States,  and  has  become  established  in  forty  or  more  of  the 
states. 

The  San  Jose  scale  was  first  discovered  in  Illinois  in  the  fall  of 
1896*,  when  it  was  found  on  about  a dozen  peach  and  apple  trees 
which  had  been  lately  received  by  Mr.  Valentine  J.  Kiem,  of  Quincy, 
from  a large  New  Jersey  nursery.  Dr.  S.  A.  Forbes  at  once  undertook 
to  learn  whether  it  had  been  introduced  elsewhere  in  Illinois.  Lists 
of  shipments  of  nursery  stock  into  the  state  made  by  all  New  Jersey 
firms  in  whose  nurseries  the  San  Jose  scale  had  been  detected,  were 
secured  thru  the  courtesy  of  the  proprietors,  and  the  imported  stock 
at  each  place  on  these  lists  was  carefully  inspected.  By  this  means 
the  scale  was  definitely  located  at  17  other  points,  scattered  thru  13 
Illinois  counties.  In  some  cases  the  infestation  was  apparently  still 
confined  to  the  imported  trees ; in  others  it  had  spread  to  trees  near  by ; 
and  in  2 cases  it  had  spread  to  adjoining  orchards,  to  an  extent  to 
show  that  it  must  have  been  introduced  several  years  before.  By 
July,  1899,  it  had  been  detected  in  30  places  scattered  thru  18  coun- 
ties, and  by  October,  1900f,  the  number  of  its  known  localities  had 
increased  to  44,  5 in  the  northern,  9 in  the  central,  and  20  in  the 
southern  part  of  the  state.  In  most  cases  the  local  distribution  was 
still  very  limited,  being  confined  in  many  cases  to  a single  orchard; 
but  in  a few  it  had  become  so  extensive  that  Dr.  Forbes  expressed  the 
opinion,  in  his  report  of  1900,  that  eradication  was  probably  no  longer 
possible  without  a destruction  of  all  infested  property.  By  February, 


•Twentieth  Rep.  State  Ent.  111.,  p.  1. 

fRep.  111.  State  Ent.  concerning  Operations  under  the  Horticultural  Inspec- 
tion Act.  Oct.  31,  1900. 


1 


1903*,  it  had  been  found  in  64  Illinois  localities ; and  very  thoro  insec- 
ticide operations  in  nearly  all  of  them  had  exterminated  it  in  only  8. 

In  1906f,  51  of  the  102  counties  of  the  state  were  known  to  be 
more  or  less  infested;  but  43  per  cent  of  the  infested  orchards  were 
in  2 of  these  counties.  Even  in  these  2 counties  the  scale  had  not  yet 
become  general,  and  in  30  of  the  others  listed  the  average  number  of 
infested  orchards  was  only  3RS. 

In  1908  the  San  Jose  scale  was  known  to  be  present  in  79  counties, 
in  10  of  which,  all  in  the  southern  part  of  the  state,  the  infestation 
had  become  general.  In  10  counties  it  was  limited  to  3 centers;  in  17 
counties,  to  2 centers;  and  in  22  counties,  to  1 center.  In  the  same 
year,  1007  farm  orchards  lying  in  two  belts,  each  half  a mile  wide, 
one  extending  north  and  south,  from  Rockford  to  Centralia,  and  the 
other  east  and  west,  from  Danville  to  East  Hannibal,  were  inspected 
to  see  to  what  extent  they  were  infested  by  the  San  Jose  scale.  Thirty- 
nine  of  these  orchards  or  3.87  per  cent,  were  found  infested;  from 
which  fact  we  may  infer  that  about  4 per  cent  of  the  farm  orchards 
of  the  state  were  infested  at  that  time. 

No  attempt  has  been  made  since  1908  to  collect  data  of  its  spread, 
or  to  seek  out  new  centers  of  dispersal.  At  least  eight  counties  more 
have  nevertheless  been  added  to  the  list,  and  it  probably  might  be 
found  to  some  extent  in  nearly  every  county  in  the  state. 

Many  southern,  and  some  central  and  western  counties  are  quite 
generally  infested,  and  in  some  of  these  counties  the  Osage  orange 
hedges  are  commonly  infested  as  well  as  the  orchards.  The  infesta- 
tion is  by  no  means  general,  however,  in  all  the  southern  and  western 
counties.  In  1912,  of  78  orchards  averaging  over  1000  trees  each, 
inspected  in  Pike  county,  37  per  cent  were  found  infested ; of  55 
orchards  in  Jefferson  county  averaging  over  500  trees  each,  96  per  cent; 
and  of  85  orchards  in  Wayne  county  averaging  over  600  trees  each, 
14  per  cent  were  infested.  The  San  Jose  scale  is  to  be  found  in  prac- 
tically all  the  towns  and  villages  of  the  southern  part  of  the  state. 
It  has  also  reached  many  towns  and  orchards  in  northern  Illinois, 
but  in  much  smaller  proportion  than  farther  south.  It  also  multiplies 
less  rapidly,  and  is  hence  far  less  destructive,  in  the  northern  counties 
with  their  cooler  climate  and  shorter  growing  season. 


*Rep.  111.  State  Ent.  on  the  Horticultural  Inspection  Law.  Nov.  1,  1900- 
February  1,  1903. 


fBull.  62,  Bur.  Ent.,  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  p.  23. 


8 


Dangerous  Character  of  the  Scale 

It  is  difficult  for  one  to  realize  fully  the  dangerous  character  of 
the  San  Jose  scale  unless  he  has  seen  its  work.  It  feeds  on  the  sap  of 
the  host  plant.  The  amount  of  sap  that  a single  individual,  or  even 
several  hundred  individuals  could  extract  could  not  injure  a healthy 
tree  or  shrub,  but  the  species  multiplies  so  rapidly,  that  from  a few 
scattered  parents  millions  of  progeny  may  be  produced  in  a season  or 
two,  sufficient  to  cover  completely  the  bark  of  parts,  or  even  all,  of  the 
tree  (PI.  I.,  Figs.  1,  2;  and  PI.  II.,  Fig.  1.)  Most  of  our  insect  pests 
have  natural  enemies  which  so  restrain  their  multiplication  that  they 
become  destructively  abundant  only  now  and  then;  but  those  of  the 
San  Jose  scale  are  inadequate  to  its  control.  A young  tree  or  shrub 
may  be  killed  by  the  scale  in  two  or  three  years ; older  trees  withstand 
the  attack  longer,  but  sooner  or  later  are  likewise  destroyed.  Young 
orchards  are  killed  out  more  quickly  than  old  ones ; and  where  young 
trees  are  set  in  old  infested  orchards,  they  also  become  infested  and  die 
before  they  are  old  enough  to  fruit.  Where  this  insect  is  present, 
orchards  or  other  plantations  containing  trees  susceptible  to  its  injury 
can  only  be  preserved  by  spraying. 

The  scale  does  not  confine  its  attack  to  the  bark  of  the  tree,  but 
infests  the  leaves  and  fruit  also.  The  fruit  of  apple,  peach,  and  pear 
frequently  become  as  badly  infested  as  the  bark.  (See  PI.  III.,  Figs. 
1,  2.)  It  is  comparatively  easy  to  prevent  serious  injury  to  the  tree 
by  the  use  of  proper  measures  of  control;  but  it  is  very  difficult  to  pre- 
vent some  spotting  of  the  fruit.  Scaly  fruit  is  unsightly  and  unsalable, 
and  does  not  keep  well,  and  the  annual  loss  in  Illinois  from  this  cause 
is  very  large,  even  in  orchards  which  are  fairly  well  sprayed. 

The  small  size  and  inconspicuous  character  of  the  San  Jose  scale 
add  very  greatly  to  its  economic  importance.  The  best-trained  in- 
spector can  not  be  depended  upon  to  detect  it  in  every  case  of  slight 
infestation,  and  those  unfamiliar  with  it  rarely  distinguish  it  until 
it  has  done  much  harm,  and  has  had  time  to  become  so  widely  dis- 
tributed that  its  eradication  is  impossible. 

Life  History  and  Appearance 

The  female  San  Jose  scale  does  not  lay  eggs,  as  most  insects  do, 
but  brings  forth  living  young,  which  are  just  visible  to  the  unaided 
eye  as  yellow  crawling  specks.  They  move  about  for  periods  varying 
with  the  temperature  from  twelve  to  forty-eight  hours.  An  experi- 
ment made  in  New  York  by  Lowe  and  Parrott  shows  that  the  crawling 
young  may  travel  at  the  rate  of  2.1  inches  an  hour  as  a six-hour  aver- 


9 


age.  They  then  insert  their  bristle-like  beaks  into  the  bark  and  begin 
to  feed.  A day  or  two  after  settling  down  they  are  completely  cov- 
ered by  white  waxy  filaments  secreted  by  glands  scattered  over  the 
body;  and  these  filaments  soon  run  together  to  form  a continuous 
waxy  covering.  At  this  stage  of  development  the  insect  is  easily  de- 
tected; but  in  a few  days  the  waxy  covering  becomes  dark  and  very 
difficult  to  detect  with  the  unaided  eye,  especially  on  a dark  surface. 
When  viewed  with  a hand  lens,  however,  it  looks  not  unlike  a minia- 
ture volcano,  having  the  shape  of  a very  low  cone  with  a circular 
ridge  at  the  apex,  inside  of  which  is  a nipple-like  elevation.  As  the 
insect  grows  the  scale  enlarges,  the  female  scale  remaining  almost 
circular  with  the  nipple  near  the  center  (PI.  II.,  Fig.  2),  and  the  male 
scale  becoming  about  twice  as  long  as  wide,  with  the  nipple  near 
one  end  (PI.  II.,  Fig.  3).  In  summer  or  fall,  examples  of  all  these 
stages  may  be  seen  on  the  bark  of  an  infested  tree,  but  in  winter  and 
early  spring  only  the  small,  dark,  immature  scales  and  the  mature 
males  and  females  are  found. 

Scattered  specimens  of  the  San  Jose  scale  are  difficult  to  find, 
but  they  may  be  discovered  with  the  aid  of  a good  pocket-lens.  When 
numerous,  the  crawling  young  and  those  in  the  white  stage  may  be 
readily  detected  with  the  unaided  eye;  when  the  bark  is  heavily  in- 
fested with  mature  insects  it  becomes  completely  incrusted  with  then' 
waxy  coverings  and  has  a rough,  ashy-gray  appearance  which  is  easily 
recognized.  Parts  of  trees  so  infested  are  usually  seriously  injured. 
The  unhealthy  appearance  of  a tree  or  limb  during  the  growing  sea- 
son is  therefore  an  indication  of  the  possible  presence  of  the  scale, 
and  should  lead  at  once  to  a careful  examination.  On  fruit  and  on 
tender  bark  the  scale  produces  a conspicuous  red  spot,  and  by  watching 
the  fruit  the  orchardist  may  usually  detect  its  presence  in  bearing  trees 
before  it  has  caused  serious  injury. 

When  mature,  the  male  comes  out  from  under  its  waxy  covering 
as  a very  delicate  two-winged  insect  (Fig.  1).  The  female  (Fig.  2) 
remains  alive  under  her  covering  for  about  six  weeks  after  reaching 
maturity,  gives  birth  to  a new  generation,  and  then  dies. 

The  winter  is  passed  in  an  immature  stage,  on  the  bark  of  the  host 
plant.  In  spring  the  hibernating  individuals  continue  their  growth  and 
mature  usually  about  the  latter  part  of  May,  and  by  the  first  of  June 
the  young  of  the  first  generation  begin  to  appear,  the  time  varying 
greatly  with  the  latitude  and  character  of  the  season.  In  an  experi- 
ment made  by  James  A.  West,  of  the  State  Entomologist’s  stafif,  at 
Urbana  in  1908,  the  first  young  appeared  May  30,  and  reproduction 


10 


Fig.  2.  San  Jose  scale:  a,  mature  female  scale,, 
showing  general  form  of  the  insect  and  the 
threadlike  mouth-bristles  with  which  it  pierces^ 
the  bark  and  sucks  sap  from  the  tree;  b , caudal 
end  of  female  scale,  showing  lobes  and  spines. 


11 


continued  for  1 52  days,  closing  October  28.  The  following  table  shows 
the  dates  of  birth  and  of  maturity  of  the  first-born  and  the  last-born 
of  each  generation . 


Generations 

Time  of  appearance 

Time  of  maturing 

First-born 

Last-born 

First-born 

Last-born 

First 

May  30 
July  10 

July  15 
October  1 
October  28 
October  28 

July  10 
August  16 
September  18 
October  29* 

August  19 
Hibernate 
Hibernate 
Hibernate 

Second. . 

Third 

August  16 
September  18 

Fourth 

A new  generation  of  young  began  to  appear  every  thirty-seven 
days,  and  the  average  period  during  which  each  female  reproduced  was 
forty-three  days.  The  average  number  of  young  produced  by  the  over- 
wintering females  was  147.5,  and  the  averages  for  the  females  of  the 
first,  second,  and  third  generations  were  472.5,  509,  and  247.5  respec- 
tively. 

Two  full  and  two  partial  generations  were  produced,  and  the 
first  representatives  of  a fifth  generation  were  due  to  appear  when 
reproduction  ceased.  All  of  the  first  and  nearly  all  of  the  second 
generation  reached  maturity  before  the  close  of  the  season,  but  the 
larger  part  of  the  partial  third  and  nearly  all  of  the  partial  fourth 
generations  were  still  immature  at  its  close,  and  thus  entered  the  win- 
ter in  this  stage. 

This  record  may  be  considered  as  typical  for  the  latitude  of  Ur- 
bana.  In  the  southern  part  of  the  state,  where  the  season  is  some- 
what longer,  and  in  any  season  lengthened  by  an  unusually  early  spring 
or  a late  autumn,  a partial  fifth  generation  is  no  doubt  produced.  In 
the  northern  part  of  the  state,  where  the  season  is  shorter,  the  fifth 
generation  probably  never  appears,  and  the  fractional  parts  of  the 
third  and  fourth  generations  are  much  smaller  than  in  the  latitude  of 
Urbana. 

A small  variation  in  the  length  of  the  season  affects  very  greatly 
the  abundance  of  the  scale.  This  is  true  of  all  insects  having  a short 
life-cycle,  with  several  generations  in  a season,  especially  if  each  female 
produces  many  young,  unless,  indeed,  natural  checks  effectually  re- 
strain the  species.  The  enormous  fecundity  of  such  insects  is  one  of 


•Date  computed. 


12 


the  most  interesting  and  important  features  of  their  economy.  Pre- 
vious attempts  to  estimate  the  possible  number  of  offspring  descending, 
under  ideal  conditions,  from  a single  female  San  Jose  scale  during  a 
season,  have  not  taken  sufficient  account  of  the  many  complex  factors 
of  the  problem.  The  writer  has  here  attempted  to  make  such  an  esti- 
mate with  some  degree  of  accuracy,  having  in  view  the  percentage 
of  males,  the  periods  of  growth,  and  the  rate  of  reproduction  in  each 
generation.  The  data  relative  to  the  percentage  of  females  are  from 
Mr.  Pergande’s  Washington  experiment  of  1896,  and  the  others  are 
from  Mr.  West’s  experiment.  They  are  summarized  in  the  following 
table. 


Reproducing  females 

Per  cent 
of 

females 

Growth 

period, 

days 

Repro- 

ducing 

period, 

days 

Av.  No. 
of 

young 

Daily 
rate  of 
reproduc- 
tion 

Overwintering  female. . . 

44 

147 

3.102 

1st  generation 

35 

ii 

43 

473 

11. 

2d  generation 

35 

37 

44 

509 

11.57 

3d  generation 

70 

34 

39 

247.5 

6.346 

4th  generation 

CO 

40* 

39 

From  these  data  were  obtained  the  number  of  young  that  would 
be  produced  for  periods  of  142  days,  152  days,  and  162  days,  respec- 
tively, as  shown  in  the  following  table. 


Generations 

Number  of  descendants  during  a repro- 
ducing season  lasting 

142  days 

152  days 

162  days 

First 

147 

24,123 

1,510.908 

10,465,685 

147 

24.123 

1,871.025 

30,896,177 

147 

24,123 

2,181,684 

69,133.639 

1,572,637 

Second 

Third 

Fourth 

Fifth 

Total 

12,000,863 

32,791,472 

72,912,230 

The  figures  in  the  middle  column  are  for  the  season  of  Mr.  West’s 
experiment,  which  began  May  30,  and  closed  October  28.  Taking  the 
growth  period  of  the  males  as  twenty-five  days,  and  their  adult  period 


•Assumed. 


Plate  1 


Fig.  1.  Plum  bark  incrusted  with  San  Jose  Scale,  enlarged  eight  diameters 
to  show  the  individual  scales. 


Fig.  2.  San  Jose  Scale  on  peach.  X S. 


Plate  II 


Fig.  1.  San  Jose  Scale  incrusting  apple  bark.  X 8. 


Fig.  2.  San  Jose  Scale  on  peach,  showing  mature  female  scales  and  young 
in  different  stages.  X 8. 


Fig.  3.  San  Jose  Scale  on  peach.  The  large  circular  scales  are  females; 
the  smaller,  elongated  scales  are  males;  and  the  small  circular  scales  are  young  in 
different  stages  of  growth.  X 8. 


Plate 


Fig.  1.  Pear  infested  with  San  Jose  Scale.  (Kansas  State 
Entomological  Commission.) 


Fig.  2.  A part  of  the  pear  (Fig.  1)  enlarged  to  show  the  individual 
scales.  (Kansas  State  Entomological  Commission.) 


Plate  IV 


Parasitized  San  Jose  scales  showing  the  characteristic  holes 
in  the  scales  through  which  the  adult  parasites  escaped.  X S. 


Classification  of  Product  as  to  Stages  of  Development 


13 


■ -i  a w ~ 

M 0.^3  H 

A o 


CO 

rH  CO  r~  CO 

1 

O’T'-'O 

t -1- 

Cl 

rt 

oo''cTr-r 

1.0 

O co 

LO 

© 

coo 

oo 

i-Too 

cT 

1—1 

1—1 

o 

fn 

co  o co  i— i 

LO 

Cl  GO  o i— 

LO 

CO 

co  co  ^ 

LO 

^© 

lOM® 

lO 

r— 1 CO  1.0 

co 

O CO 

& 

CM* 

cm' 

f ' 

r-< 

CO 

o >o  CO  o 

QO 

© 

H 

© 

C05^ 

Cl 

p 

C3 

LO'co' 

go' 

43 

c- 

io  co 

GO 

rt 

Cl  o 

HT* 

a 

© 

’ 

erT 

cT 

a 

1—1 

Vi 

0..0  tr~  i— 

0) 

O rH 

CM 

,0 

CO 

Cl  co 

CM 

a 

© 

CO'r-T 

co' 

CO  CM 

00 

p 

CM  O 

CM 

% 

(of 

of 

T—l 

CO 

O CO  -f  CO 

co 

io  l-  CO 

Cl 

TJ  . 

© 

1—  OH 

LO_ 

C 

c3 

lo'-nT-^jT 

H* 

c3  C 

a 

i.O 

CO 

co 

CO 

rp‘> 
© 33 

r° 

V 

p >1 

O r-  CM  00 

r- 

a5 

O CO  CM 

Cl 

CO 

r— 1 CM  Cl 

CM„ 

. o 

CD 

-th'cm' 

r-' 

o £ 

rt 

lO 

Cl 

CM 

CM 

CO 

hNOO 

CO 

O lO 

o 

T3 

© 

CO 

G 

c3 

CM 

cm' 

be 

a 

-o  c 

o 

'C  ct; 
© 2 
V V P 
3 003 

43  O 

lW  S-H 

CO  CO  Cl  CO 

r<  ^ ft 

a © © 

.TO  V 

Cl  to  CO  CM 

co 

co 

^© 

lO  t—  CM 
‘O'eTriT 

o 

o' 

o 

rt 

r— 1 1.0  00 

LO 

fc 

CM 

CO 

43 

£ 

o 

>- 

be 


QJ 

be 

a 

43 

TJ1 


O CM 
co 

CO  rH 


TH  T-i  CM 

co  CO 


Cl  GO 

r— 

Cl  rH 

rH 

C1Q 

o 

co'oo' 

•o' 

CO  GO 

LO 

CO 

CO 

cf 

Cl 

1 — 1 

t-  GO 
Hr  GO 
GO  CM 


© 5 

si 

^ s 

31 


14 


General  Summary  as  to  Mortality 


Condition 

Males 

Females 

Total 

2s  umber 

Per 

cent 

Number 

Per 

cent 

Number 

Per 

cent 

Dead 

Living 

Total 

350,034 

12,585,521 

1.067 

38.03 

2,403 

19,853,514 

.008 

60.895 

352,437 

32,439,035 

1.075 

98.925 

12,935,555 

39.097 

19,855,917 

60.903 

32,791,472 

100. 

as  five  days;  the  growth  period  of  females  as  thirty-seven  days  and 
their  reproductive  period  as  forty-two  days;  and  assuming  that  Per- 
gande’s  percentages  of  males  and  females  in  the  various  generations 
hold  true  thruout  the  season,  a classification  of  the  product  as  to  stages 
of  development  at  the  close  of  the  season  may  be  made  as  shown, 
above. 

The  most  interesting  inferences  from  this  computation  are  the 
enormous  number  of  offspring  theoretically  possible  under  optimum 
conditions,  the  large  variations  in  the  total  product  due  to  slight  differ- 
ences in  the  length  of  the  reproducing  season,  and  the  surprisingly 
large  per  cent  of  the  progeny  which  are  still  alive  at  the  close  of  the 
season. 

No  account  could  be  taken  of  the  many  mishaps  which  must  pre- 
vent many  of  the  young  from  reaching  maturity  and  many  of  the 
adult  females  from  producing  their  full  quota  of  young;  hence  it  is 
not  really  possible  that  the  number  of  young  produced  ever  equals 
that  here  shown  to  be  possible  theoretically.  On  the  other  hand, 
these  results  have  been  worked  out  with  mathematical  accuracy  from 
averages  actually  secured  in  breeding  experiments,  and  must  serve  to 
convince  any  one  that  the  San  Jose  scale,  if  allowed  to  multiply 
unchecked  on  any  favorable  host  plant  or  in  any  community, 
will  prove  to  be  a very  destructive  pest,  and  they  must  also  make  it 
clear  that  spraying  to  control  it  must  be  done  so  thoroly  as  to  destroy 
nearly  or  quite  every  living  insect. 

Under  the  conditions  which  obtained  in  Mr.  West’s  experiments, 
the  addition  of  ten  days  to  the  reproducing  season  would  have  more 
than  doubled  the  theoretical  product.  This  serves  to  explain  why  the 
scale  is  so  much  more  abundant  and  destructive  in  the  southern  part 
of  the  state  than  in  the  northern,  and  why  it  increases  so  much  more 
rapidly  in  some  seasons  than  in  others. 


15 


The  continuous  multiplication  of  the  insect  is  greatly  checked, 
however,  in  our  latitude  by  the  fact  that  when  cold  weather  overtakes 
it,  nearly  97  per  cent  of  the  total  product  is  still  immature  and  must 
pass  the  hazards  of  winter  before  its  multiplication  can  begin.  Our 
computation  of  the  relative  numbers  of  males  and  females  was  based 
on  averages  determined  from  the  first  representatives  of  each  genera- 
tion. Males  predominate  in  the  early  part  of  the  season,  and  it  is 
quite  certain  that  they,  also  predominate  in  the  latter  part,  especially  in 
view  of  Marlatt’s  statement  that  in  the  hibernating  group  “The  male 
scales  are  normally  vastly  in  excess  of  the  females,  often  representing 
95  or  more  per  cent.”*  On  this  basis,  out  of  31,777,142  immature, 
according  to  my  computation,  at  the  close  of  the  season,  only  1,588,857 
would  have  been  females;  and  these  must  pass  the  winter  successfully 
before  becoming  capable  of  further  increase. 

Food  Plants 

The  San  Jose  scale  is  known  to  infest  about  a hundred  and  fifty 
kinds  of  trees  and  shrubs.  On  some  it  multiplies  rapidly  and  causes 
serious  injury;  on  others  it  rarely  becomes  abundant  enough  to  be 
dangerously  injurious;  and  on  still  others  it  can  not  permanently  main- 
tain itself. 

The  following  are  some  of  the  more  important  kinds  of  trees  and 
shrubs  which  are  likely  to  be  seriously  injured;  apple,  peach,  pear, 
plum,  and  sweet  cherry,  with  their  nearly  related  wild  and  ornamental 
species;  currant,  dogwood,  Japan  quince,  June-berry,  lilac,  hawthorn, 
European  purple-leaved  beech,  flowering  almond,  rose,  snowberry, 
buckthorn,  young  poplar,  young  elm,  willow,  mountain-ash,  linden,  and 
Osage  orange. 

The  following  become  infested  when  surrounded  by  badly  in- 
fested trees,  but  are  rarely  seriously  injured : sour  cherry,  Kiefifer 
pear,  blackberry,  raspberry,  dewberry,  mulberry,  grape,  maple,  chest- 
nut, horse-chestnut,  birch,  catalpa,  ash,  locust,  walnut,  Virginia  creeper, 
Deutzia,  Spiraea,  persimmon,  Althea,  globe-flower,  California  privet, 
honeysuckle,  sumac,  smoke-tree,  and  Wisteria. 

The  following  seem  to  be  exempt  from  attack:  redbud,  yellow- 
wood,  Kentucky  cofifee-tree,  hickory,  butternut,  sweet  gum,  tulip,  iron- 
wood,  buttonwood,  oak,  Ailanthus,  pawpaw,  barberry,  Mahonia,  trum- 
pet-vine, sweet-scented  shrub,  bittersweet,  button-bush,  filbert,  hazel- 
nut, weigela,  huckleberry,  witch-hazel,  English  ivy,  hydrangea,  gold- 
flower,  matrimony-vine,  mock-orange,  and  evergreens. 


♦Bull.  62,  Bur.  Ent.,  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  p.  43. 


16 


The  statement  is  frequently  made  that  the  forests  are  full  of 
the  scale,  but  this  is  a mistake.  It  will  be  seen  from  the  above  lists 
that  many  forest  trees  are  not  liable  to  attack,  and  few  of  those  that 
are  so,  will  support  the  scale  in  any  considerable  numbers.  Our  native 
dogwoods  are  apparently  less  subject  to  infestation  than  some  of  the 
imported  species.  Wild  crab-apple  and  hawthorn  and  a few  of  the 
other  more  or  less  susceptible  trees  and  shrubs  are  likely  to  become 
infested  when  growing  near  orchards,  and  it  is  possible  that  in  some 
localities  these  susceptible  species  are  harboring  the  scale  in  forests. 

Osage  orange  hedges  are  very  apt  to  become  heavily  infested  and 
form  great  highways  for  the  dispersal  of  the  scale.  They  should  there- 
fore be  grubbed  out  or  kept  trimmed  so  low  that  they  may  be  thoroly 
sprayed. 

Means  of  Distribution 

By  Birds , Squirrels , Insects,  Wind,  etc. — It  is  only  while  in  the 
crawling  stage,  during  the  first  few  hours  of  its  life,  that  the  San 
Jose  scale  can  be  transferred  from  one  food  plant  to  another,  because 
as  soon  as  it  begins  to  feed  it  becomes  fixed  to  the  bark  for  the  rest 
of  its  life.  In  most  cases  the  young  do  not  travel  more  than  a few 
inches  from  the  place  of  their  birth ; and  one  part  of  a tree  may  con- 
sequently become  heavily  infested  while  another  part  is  comparatively 
clear.  The  larvae  can  not  pass  from  tree  to  tree  unaided  unless  the 
twigs  touch  or  the  trees  stand  very  close  together,  as  in  the  nursery 
row;  but  they  may  be  carried  to  neighboring  trees  by  a variety  of 
agencies,  the  principal  of  which  are  birds,  squirrels,  insects,  men,  do- 
mestic animals,  and  the  wind.  They  may  also  be  carried  on  fruit  or 
on  cuttings  from  trees.  In  this  way  they  pass  from  tree  to  tree  and 
from  orchard  to  orchard.  In  communities  where  orchards  are  close 
together,  the  scale  may  spread  from  a single  center  over  a very  large 
area  in  the  course  of  a few  years.  In  towns,  also,  it  gradually  extends 
its  range  until  all  premises  become  infested. 

The  rate  at  which  it  spreads  depends,  of  course,  upon  the  num- 
ber of  crawling  young.  When  nothing  is  done  to  keep  them  down, 
they  become  very  numerous,  and  every  bird  or  insect  that  flies  from 
a tree  so  infested  may  carry  some  of  them  with  it,  and  drop  them, 
perhaps,  many  rods,  or  even  miles,  away.  But  when  the  number  of 
young  is  kept  down  by  proper  treatment,  their  dissemination  is  corre- 
spondingly slow.  In  farming  communities  where  the  orchards  are 
small  and  half  a mile  or  more  apart,  there  is  little  danger  that  the  scale 
will  be  carried  from  one  to  another  if  hedges  are  removed  or  cared 
for  and  if  proper  methods  of  control  are  used. 


17 


On  Nursery  Stock. — In  the  dormant  state,  the  San  Jose  scale  may 
be  carried  to  any  distance  on  nursery  stock,  cuttings,  and  scions.  It  is 
thus  that  it  was  transported  from  its  original  home  in  China  to  the 
shores  of  California,  and  thence  to  all  the  principal  fruit-growing  sec- 
tions of  the  United  States. 

Means  of  Control 

Natural  Checks. — Several  natural  agencies  very  materially  check 
the  multiplication  of  the  San  Jose  scale,  but  it  multiplies  so  rapidly 
that  its  numbers  increase  greatly  notwithstanding.  The  chief  of  these 
checks  are  climatic  conditions,  predaceous  and  parasitic  insects,  and 
fungous  diseases. 

Under  adverse  climatic  conditions  may  be  included  winds,  rains, 
and  extremes  of  heat  and  cold.  Blustering  winds  and  dashing  rains 
sweep  many  of  the  crawling  young  from  the  bark.  Not  infrequently 
more  of  them  may  be  found  on  the  ground  under  badly  infested  trees 
than  on  the  trees  themselves,  and  very  few  of  these  ever  get  back  to 
the  tree  on  find  other  food  plants.  The  scale  does  not  thrive  in  those 
parts  of  our  country  where  the  summers  are  long  and  excessively  hot 
and  dry;  and  it  has  failed  to  establish  itself  in  some  of  the  northern 
states,  where  the  winters  are  long  and  severe.  In  a few  instances  a 
very  heavy  mortality,  resulting  from  these  unfavorable  conditions, 
has  been  noticed  in  Illinois.  In  St.  Clair  county  in  the  spring  of  1902, 
from  21  to  69  per  cent  of  the  scales  which  might  have  been  expected 
to  live  were  found  to  be  dead.  This  loss  was  attributed  to  the  hot, 
dry  weather  of  the  preceding  summer,  when  temperatures  reached 
109°  F.  in  the  shade.  Again,  in  the  spring  of  1911,  counts  of  dead  and 
living  scales  made  from  different  parts  of  Illinois  showed  that  from  45 
to  98  per  cent  of  the  hibernating  insects  were  dead — a mortality  due, 
for  the  most  part,  to  the  severity  of  the  preceding  winter,  during 
which  temperatures  of  — 24°  F.  were  reached  at  various  places  in  the 
state.  Such  extremes,  however,  are  so  rare  in  Illinois  that  the  San 
Jose  scale  ordinarily  suffers  little  from  such  causes. 

Several  lady-beetles  and  their  larvae  feed  on  the  San  Jose  scale; 
a number  of  hymenopterous  insects  parasitize  it ; and  it  is  also  attacked 
by  fungous  diseases.  These  natural  enemies  have  controlled  it  very 
effectively  in  a few  regions,  but  only  where  climatic  conditions  are 
favorable  to  their  rapid  and  continuous  multiplication,  as  in  Florida  and 
California.  In  Illinois,  and  in  nearly  all  the  interior  states,  the  cli- 
mate is  adverse  for  so  much  of  the  time  that  little  assistance  can  be 
expected  from  these  natural  enemies. 


18 


In  some  of  the  eastern  states,  however,  hymenopterous  parasites 
of  the  San  Jose  scale  have  been  notably  more  abundant  during  the  last 
two  or  three  years  than  formerly,  and  in  some  localities  the  percentage 
of  parasitism  has  been  very  high.  (See  PI.  IV.)  Apparently 
however,  this  high  percentage  has  not  remained  permanent.  In  some 
localities,  at  least,  where  parasites  were  very  abundant  for  one  year, 
scarcely  any  could  be  found  the  next,  tho  the  scale  itself  continued  to 
be  destructively  numerous.  We  may  confidently  expect,  however,  that 
as  the  number  of  species  of  parasites  which  attack  it  increases,  and  as 
they  become  better  adapted  to  it  as  a host,  they  will  prove  more  and 
more  effective ; and  they  may  indeed  come  to  control  it  in  time  as 
thoroly  as  they  now  control  our  native  species. 

To  learn  whether  the  eastern  parasites  of  the  scale  are  present 
in  Illinois,  twigs  bearing  it  were  collected  in  the  fall  of  1913  from 
thirty  localities  in  central  and  southern  Illinois,  and  kept  in  breeding- 
cages.  From  about  half  of  them  no  parasites  were  secured;  from  the 
other  half  a small  number  were  obtained,  all  of  one  species  ( Aphelinus 
fuscipennis) . 

This  is  one  of  the  species  found  in  the  East,  but  it  is  not  the  most 
abundant  there ; and  an  attempt  has  been  made  this  season  to  introduce 
parasites  from  the  eastern  states  into  Illinois.  This  has  been  at  least 
partially  successful,  but  only  enough  scales  thus  parasitized  have  been 
found  to  show  that  the  transfer  was  actually  made. 

From  San  Jose  scales  collected  in  northern  Illinois  last  fall  (1914), 
large  numbers  of  parasites  emerged,  examples  of  which  were  identified 
by  Dr.  L.  O.  Howard  as  belonging  to  the  following  species : Perissop- 
terus  pulchellus  How.,  Aphelinus  diaspidis  How.,  Micropterys  sp., 
Signiphora  nigrita  Ashm.,  Prospaltella  aurantii  How.,  and  Prospaltella 
perniciosi  Tower.  This  list  includes  all  the  more  important  species 
found  in  the  East.  The  first  three  were  not  plentiful  enough  to  be  im- 
portant, but  the  last  three  were  abundant,  and  may  be  of  practical 
use  if  we  can  secure  a more  uniform  distribution  of  them  thruout  the 
state.  For  the  present,  however,  spraying  is  our  only  means  of  defense. 

Preventive  Measures. — To  prevent  the  dissemination  of  the  San 
Jose  scale  by  way  of  the  nursery  trade,  all  states  now  require  an  inspec- 
tion of  nursery  stock,  and  prohibit  the  shipment  of  such  stock  unless 
accompanied  by  an  inspection  certificate.  All  Illinois  nurseries  are 
inspected  each  year;  and  those  which  are  at  all  likely  to  be  infested 
by  the  San  Jose  scale  are  inspected  at  least  twice  annually.  All  nursery 
stock  found  infested  in  them  is  immediately  destroyed,  and  all  stock 
which,  on  account  of  its  proximity  to  infested  trees  and  shrubs,  is  at 


19 


all  likely  to  be  infested  at  the  time,  or  to  become  infested  before  the 
end  of  the  nursery  season,  is  fumigated  with  hydrocyanic  acid  gas 
before  it  is  sent  out  from  the  nursery.  By  these  precautions  the  dan- 
ger of  distributing  the  scale  on  nursery  stock  is  reduced  to  a mini- 
mum, but  they  nevertheless  do  not  afford  complete  protection  because 
the  scale  is  so  inconspicuous  that  the  most  careful  inspector  will  some- 
times overlook  it.  The  buyer  should  consequently  inspect  carefully  all 
trees  and  shrubs  purchased,  and,  as  an  additional  safeguard,  should 
either  fumigate  them  with  hydrocyanic  acid  gas  or  dip  them  in,  or  spray 
them  with,  a solution  of  lime  and  sulphur — to  be  described  later — 
before  setting  them  out. 

In  parts  of  the  country  where  the  San  Jose  scale  is  prevalent, 
nursery  grounds  should  be  placed  half  a mile  or  more  from  orchards 
or  other  trees  which  may  harbor  the  scale.  Even  a quarter  of  a mile 
will  afford  much  protection,  if  not  absolute  security  to  the  nursery 
stock,  especially  if  near-by  orchards  are  properly  treated  annually. 
The  common  practice  of  growing  nursery  trees  on  vacant  city  lots  or 
•close  to  infested  orchards  should  be  discontinued.  Whenever  trees, 
shrubs,  or  hedges  in  or  near  growing  nursery  stock  are  found  to  be 
infested  with  the  San  Jose  scale  they  should  be  at  once  removed. 

This  insect  is  very  often  brought  into  nurseries  on  scions  taken 
from  infested  trees;  and  these  should  not  be  used  if  it  can  be  avoided. 
If  used,  they  should  be  very  carefully  inspected,  the  infested  sticks 
should  be  discarded,  and  all  the  rest  fumigated ; and  as  a further  pre- 
caution, the  stock  should  be  thoroly  sprayed  in  spring  while  still  dor- 
mant. 

To  guard  against  an  introduction  of  the  scale  from  infested  nur- 
series, nurserymen  should  be  very  careful  to  buy  only  from  firms  which 
have  the  reputation  of  handling  clean  stock ; and  as  an  extra  precau- 
tion stock  bought  elsewhere  should  be  fumigated,  unless  the  buyer  is 
sure  that  it  is  clean. 

To  avoid  trouble  with  the  San  Jose  scale  in  cities  and  towns,  only 
trees  and  shrubs  that  are  not  subject  to  its  attack  should  be  chosen 
for  lawns  and  parks.  A yard  or  park  containing  only  trees  and  shrubs 
of  the  second  and  third  lists  given  above  will  seldom,  if  ever,  suffer 
any  serious  injury  from  the  San  Jose  scale. 

Artificial  Means  of  Control. — The  most  effective  way  to  destroy 
the  scale  is  to  grub  out  the  tree  or  shrub  which  it  infests  or  to  cut  it  off 
three  or  four  inches  below  the  surface  of  the  ground.  If  the  infested 
plant  is  not  cut  off  low  enough,  some  scales  will  probably  be  left  on  the 
stump,  and  from  these,  shoots  which  grow  up  around  the  stump  will 
become  infested. 


20 


If  the  scale  is  discovered  in  any  locality  before  it  has  spread  to  any 
considerable  extent,  it  can  usually  be  eradicated  by  grubbing  out  ail 
trees  found  to  be  infested,  and  by  spraying  thoroly  all  others  in  the 
vicinity;  but  if  it  has  had  time  to  spread  to  a number  of  trees,  its 
eradication  will  in  many  cases  be  impracticable.  Even  then,  however, 
it  may  be  controlled  by  spraying  annually  with  one  of  the  solutions 
described  below. 

Spraying  for  this  scale  should  be  done  when  the  trees  are  dormant, 
for  solutions  strong  enough  to  kill  the  insect  after  it  has  formed  its 
protecting  scale  will  seriously  injure  the  foliage  and  the  tender  growth 
of  many  trees.  Spring  treatment  is  most  effective;  fall  treatment  is 
only  slightly  less  so;  but  midwinter  spraying  should  be  avoided,  and 
spraying  operations  suspended  whenever  the  temperature  in  the  shade 
approaches  freezing.  When  the  leaf-buds  swell  and  begin  to  show 
plainly  the  green  within,  the  season  is  over  for  spraying  and  it  should 
generally  be  stopped.  If,  however,  the  infestation  is  bad,  and  injury 
by  the  scale  threatens  to  be  serious,  it  may  be  advisable  to  spray  even 
at  the  risk  of  some  injury  to  foliage. 

Summer  spraying  for  the  San  Jose  scale  is  not  practicable  so  far 
as  destroying  the  scale  that  is  already  on  the  tree  is  concerned;  for, 
owing  to  the  weakness  of  the  spray  that  must  be  used,  only  the  very 
young  insects  can  be  killed  at  best,  and  since  these  are  appearing  con- 
tinually thruout  the  season,  spraying,  to  be  effective,  would  have  to 
be  repeated  every  two  or  three  days.  Summer  spraying,  however,  with 
the  lime-sulphur  is  no  doubt  of  much  value,  since  its  presence  on  the 
bark  prevents  newly  hatched  young  from  setting. 

The  Lime-Sulphur  Wasi-i 

The  “California  wash,”  of  lime,  sulphur,  and  salt,  and  the  “Oregon 
wash,”  of  fime,  sulphur,  and  blue  vitrol,  were  used  successfully  against 
the  San  Jose  scale  on  the  Pacific  coast  for  several  years  before  they 
came  into  use  in  the  central  and  eastern  states.  They  had  been  tried 
in  the  Atlantic  States,  but  with  so  little  promise  of  success  that  their 
use  was  almost  abandoned  until  in  1902  it  was  demonstrated  by  Mr. 
E.  S.  G.  Titus,  working  under  the  direction  of  Dr.  Forbes,  that  the 
lime-sulphur  washes  were  even  more  effective  than  the  other  washes 
in  general  use.  Since  then,  the  results  obtained  by  Dr.  Forbes  have 
been  verified  by  workers  in  all  the  states,  and  the  lime-sulphur  wash  is 
now  the  standard  insecticide  for  the  San  Jose  scale.  The  formula  has 
undergone  some  change,  however,  neither  the  salt  nor  the  blue  vitriol 
being  now  used. 


21 


A lime-sulphur  solution  of  the  proper  strength  will  kill  all  scales 
with  which  it  comes  in  contact,  and  it  is  also  a useful  fungicide.  It 
may  be  purchased  ready-made,  or  one  may  prepare  it  himself  by  simply 
boiling  the  ingredients  together  until  they  are  dissolved.  It  is  applied 
with  an  ordinary  spray  pump  such  as  is  commonly  used  in  orchard 
work.  These  facts  bring  the  San  Jose  scale  within  the  control  of  the 
owner  of  infested  premises,  and  make  it,  in  fact,  one  of  the  most 
easily  managed  of  the  serious  insect  pests  of  horticulture. 

Directions  for  Making. — The  mixture  may  be  boiled  either  over 
a fire  or  with  a steam  cooker.  For  boiling  over  a fire,  two  iron  kettles 
are  necessary,  one  with  a capacity  of  at  least  fifty  gallons  for  making 
the  solution,  and  another,  which  may  be  smaller,  for  keeping  a supply 
of  warm  water  at  hand.  Cold  water  is  also  needed  when  the  mixture 
threatens  to  boil  over.  If  a steam  cooker  is  available,  the  solution  may 
be  made  in  a fifty-gallon  barrel.  Smaller  vessels  may  be  used  for 
preparing  smaller  quantities  of  the  solution. 

To  make  forty  gallons  of  a concentrated  solution,  provide  thirty 
pounds  of  the  best  stone-lime  procurable,*  sixty  pounds  of  either  flour 
or  flowers  of  sulphurf,  and  water  enough  to  make  forty  gallons  when 
boiling  is  finished.  First  mix  the  sulphur  with  water  to  make  a thick 
batter,  beating  well  to  break  up  all  lumps.  If  the  sulphur  is  lumpy 
when  dry,  it  should  first  be  rubbed  thru  a wire  sieve.  Put  about  ten 
gallons  of  warm  water  in  the  cooking  vessel,  start  the  fire  under  it, 
and  add  the  sulphur  and  the  lime.  Stir  constantly,  adding  warm  water, 
if  necessary,  as  the  lime  slakes,  to  keep  it  from  burning.  After  the 
lime  is  completely  slaked  add  enough  water  to  make  forty  gallons, 
and  boil  gently,  keeping  it  well  stirred,  from  forty  to  sixty  minutes, 
or  until  the  lime  and  sulphur  are  practically  all  dissolved.  Add  a little 
warm  water  occasionally,  to  keep  the  amount  up  to  forty  gallons. 
To  make  the  wash  on  a large  scale,  more  elaborate  equipment  will  be 
needed,  but  the  process  to  be  followed  will  be  the  same. 

After  the  boiling  is  done,  the  solution  may  be  used  at  once,  or  it 
may  be  kept  indefinitely  in  air-tight  barrels.  It  should  not  be  stored 
where  it  will  freeze. 

For  spraying  dormant  trees,  use  one  gallon  of  the  above  solution 
to  four  gallons  of  water.  Stir  the  solution  thoroly,  and  pour  it  into 


tMany  use  finely  ground  brimstone.  It  is  cheaper  than  either  the  flour  or 
the  flowers  of  sulphur,  but  does  not  enter  into  solution  quite  so  readily. 

♦Forty  pounds  of  steam  hydrated  lime  may  be  substituted  for  thirty 
pounds  of  stone-lime. 


clog  the  nozzles. 


Commercial  Solutions. — Solutions  of  lime-sulphur,  which  may  be 
purchased  from  retail  dealers  or  from  the  manufacturers  ready  for  use 
after  dilution  with  eight  parts  of  water,  may  be  substituted  for  the 
home-made  preparation  described  above. 

The  commercial  solutions  cost  about  seven  dollars  a barrel.  A 
barrel  contains  about  fifty  gallons  and  when  diluted  will  make  four 
hundred  and  fifty  gallons  of  spray,  making  the  cost  about  one  and  a 
half  cents  per  gallon.  The  concentrated  solution  is  also  put  up  in  smal- 
ler packages  at  somewhat  higher  cost;  in  gallon  lots  at  fifty  cents  a 
gallon.  The  materials  for  the  home-made  solution,  when  bought  at 
wholesale,  cost  about  one  cent  a gallon  for  the  dilute  spray  ready  to 
apply. 

The  Miscible  Oils 

The  so-called  miscible  oils  are  made  of  crude  petroleum  so  treated 
as  to  remove  some  of  the  deleterious  products  and  to  cause  it  to  mix 
readily  with  water.  They  are  very  effective  scale-destroyers;  some- 
times, on  account  of  their  better  penetrating  qualities,  a little  more 
effective  than  the  lime-sulphur  on  trees  that  are  heavily  incrusted 
with  the  scale.  They  have  the  further  advantage  that  they  are  less 
disagreeable  to  handle  than  the  lime-sulphur  solution.  They  are  more 
expensive,  however,  and  if  applied  too  freely,  may  cause  serious  injury 
to  the  tree.  They  may  be  purchased  in  fifty-gallon-barrel  lots,  freight 
prepaid,  at  $25  a barrel.  In  smaller  lots  they  may  come  a little  higher. 
They  should  be  diluted  with  fifteen  parts  of  water.  One  barrel  will 
thus  make  eight  hundred  gallons  of  spray,  costing  about  three  cents  a 
gallon.  They  are  applied  the  same  way  as  the  lime-sulphur. 

Apparatus  and  Equipment 

When  the  lime-sulphur  wash  is  cooked  by  steam,  no  kettles  are 
necessary,  as  the  cooking  of  the  mixture  may  be  done  in  fifty-gallon 
barrels,  or  in  tanks  if  large  quantities  are  to  be  made.  Portable  steam- 
cookers  are  now  made  for  such  purposes.  Those  used  for  cooking 
stock-food  will  serve  to  cook  the  sulphur  wash.  Steam  cookers  are 
not  essential,  however,  and  for  ordinary  orchard  work  the  kettle  and 
the  open  fire  are  just  as  good,  altho  less  convenient. 

The  solution  should  be  strained  as  it  is  poured  into  the  spray- 
tank.  Strainers  are  made  for  the  purpose  from  brass,  to  prevent  cor- 
rosion by  the  liquid.  If  such  a strainer  is  not  at  hand,  burlap  may  be 
used  instead. 


Either  bucket  or  knapsack  pumps  may  be  sufficient  where  only  a 
few  small  trees  or  shrubs  are  to  be  sprayed.  For  very  extensive  or- 
chard treatment,  however,  power-sprayer  outfits  are  necessary ; but  the 
small  fruit-grower  may  best  use  a good  hand-power  pump,  fitted 
securely  to  a barrel  or  tank.  For  the  lime-sulphur  washes  these  pumps 
should  have  no  copper  about  them,  but  the  working  parts  should  be 
made  of  brass,  and  should  be  easily  accessible  and  easily  replaced  if 
broken.  All  valves  must  be  of  brass,  and  ground  to  fit  perfectly.  Each 
pump  should  have  an  agitator  with  both  vertical  and  horizontal  move- 
ment. Jet  agitators  are  not  satisfactory  with  any  kind  of  hand-power 
pumps.  Have  each  pump  fitted  with  a cut-off  cock  for  each  line  of 
hose  used.  Twenty-five  to  thirty-five  feet  of  best  black  four  to  five- 
ply  half-inch  hose  are  needed  for  a hand  outfit,  or  seven-ply  hose  for 
a power  outfit.  Extension  poles  are  necessary.  Bamboo  poles  with  iron 
or  brass  lining,  eight  to  twelve  feet  long,  fitted  with  good  cut-off  valves 
at  their  base,  will  be  found  the  best.  Nozzles  of  the  double  Vermorel 
or  of  the  Friend  type  are  very  satisfactory  with  these  sprays.  The 
latter  is  the  better  of  the  two,  since  it  has  no  projections  to  catch  on 
the  branches.  A good  hand-pump  with  fittings  complete,  as  just  de- 
scribed, will  cost  from  $18  to  $25,  according  to  the  size  of  the  pump 
and  the  number  of  accessories. 

Miscellaneous  Directions 

Very  large  trees,  and  those  with  brushy  tops,  should  be  pruned 
before  spraying;  and  thickets  of  plum,  peach,  and  the  like,  along 
fences  and  beside  roads,  should  be  cut  out  and  destroyed.  It  is  better 
that  all  infested  Osage  orange  hedges  be  destroyed,  as  the  scale  breeds 
as  freely  on  this  plant  as  on  any  orchard  tree,  and  it  is  difficult  to 
spray  such  a hedge  effectively.  Trees  so  heavily  infested  as  to  be 
practically  worthless  should  be  dug  up  and  burned,  since  it  will  not 
pay  to  spray  them.  Even  tho  the  scale  insects  may  be  killed,  their  in- 
juries will  usually  be  fatal  to  the  trees. 

Any  premises  which  have  once  been  infested  by  the  San  Jose 
scale  should  be  carefully  examined  from  time  to  time,  especially  late 
in  fall,  no  matter  how  thoroly  and  effectively  they  may  have  been 
treated;  and  so  long  as  living  scales  can  be  detected,  the  infested  trees 
should  receive  an  annual  treatment,  care  being  taken  to  extend  the 
treatment  far  enough  to  include  adjacent  trees  to  which  the  insect  may 
possibly  have  spread. 

Concerted  action  by  all  the  people  of  an  infested  district  is  very 
important,  since  unless  all  act  together  an  orchard  virtually  freed  from 
the  scale  will  gradually  become  reinfested  from  adjacent  premises. 


24 


It  is  true  that  even  under  the  most  unfavorable  circumstances  each 
fruit-grower  may  protect  his  trees  from  injury  by  careful  observation 
and  methodical  work,  but  by  no  amount  of  care  and  work  can  he  pre- 
vent his  fruit  from  being  spotted  by  scales  carried  to  it  by  birds  and 
insects  from  near-by  infested  trees. 

Do  not  spray  against  paint.  When  trees  to  be  sprayed  stand  near 
painted  buildings,  these  should  be  protected  by  a canvas  while  spraying 
is  being  done.  It  is  well  to  blanket  horses  used  in  the  spraying  opera- 
tions, when  a lime-sulphur  solution  is  used.  Persons  preparing  or  ap- 
plying the  lime-sulphur  spray  should  avoid  getting  it  on  the  bare  hands 
or  face,  as  it  is  very  caustic.  Leaky  hose  should  be  repaired  at  once. 
See  that  all  barrels  and  all  apparatus  are  thoroly  cleaned  before  using 
the  mixture  in  them,  otherwise  the  nozzles  are  likely  to  clog.  Thoroly 
clean  kettles,  hose,  barrels,  pumps,  nozzles,  and  all  spraying  apparatus 
when  the  work  is  over  for  the  season. 

Thoroly  coat  the  trees,  being  careful  to  cover  the  smaller  twigs 
and  branches  and  to  get  the  mixture  in  all  the  forks  and  crevices.  Spray 
every  part  of  each  tree  from  two  sides.  If  a heavy  rain  follows  soon 
after  spraying,  the  treatment  should  be  repeated. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


CIRCULAR  No.  181 


HOW  NOT  TO  TREAT  ILLINOIS  SOILS 


By  Cyril  G.  Hopkins 


/ 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  APRIL,  1915 


HOW  NOT  TO  TREAT  ILLINOIS  SOILS1 


By  Cyril  G.  Hopkins,  Chief  in  Agronomy  and  Chemistry 

That  the  soil  responds  generally  and  generously  to  good  treatment 
is  common  knowledge,  and  that  bad  treatment  of  the  soil  leads  ulti- 
mately to  impoverishment,  land  ruin,  and  farm  abandonment  is  like- 
wise an  established  fact. 


Abandoned  Farms 

The  United  States  Bureau  of  Census  reports  a decrease  in  the 
area  of  improved  farm  land  during  the  last  census  decade  (1900  to 
1910)  of  224,747  acres  in  Old  Virginia,  161,585  acres  likewise  agri- 
culturally abandoned  in  Maryland,  173,706  acres  in  New  Jersey,  535,- 
664  acres  in  Pennsylvania,  755,947  acres  in  New  York,  and  879,499 
acres  in  New  England. 

The  aggregate  area  of  improved  farm  land  agriculturally  aban- 
doned in  New  England,  New  York,  New  Jersey,  and  Pennsylvania 
from  1880  to  1910  was  9,809,834  acres.  The  area  of  improved  farm 
land  which  has  thus  been  abandoned  during  the  last  generation  in 
New  England  and  three  Middle  Atlantic  states  exceeds  the  total  land 
area  of  both  Maryland  and  Delaware ; it  is  more  than  twice  the  area 
of  New  Jersey;  it  is  greater  than  the  combined  area  of  Massachusetts, 
Rhode  Island,  and  Connecticut;  and  more  than  one-third  the  total 
area  of  improved  farm  land  in  Illinois. 

It  is  said  that  a school  boy,  when  asked  to  describe  the  ant,  an- 
swered that  the  ant  is  not  like  the  elephant ; and  so,  if  I am  to  tell 
how  not  to  treat  Illnois  soils,  I feel  like  saying,  not  like  the  soils  of 
our  Eastern  states  have  been  treated.  Show  me  productive  land,  and 
I will  show  a prosperous  people;  and  conversely,  an  impoverished 
soil  produces  inevitable  poverty  among  the  masses,  including  not  only 
the  farmers  but  all  industrial  people  whose  business  depends  upon 
farm  products. 

During  the  last  census  decade,  the  area  of  improved  farm  land  in 
Illinois  increased  by  349,104  acres;  but  we  are  approaching  the  limit 
of  the  total  possible  acreage  of  land  to  be  cropped  in  this  state,  and 
any  future  increase  in  Illinois  crops  must  be  largely  along  the  line 

Address  before  the  Illinois  State  Farmers 1 Institute  at  Harrisburg,  Feb- 
ruary 23,  1915. 


4 


of  soil  improvement  and  bigger  acre-yields.  Soil  improvement  re- 
quires investment;  and  unless  the  farm  yields  an  income  above  the 
living  and  other  fixed  expenses,  the  average  farmer  has  no  money  to 
invest  in  soil  improvement. 

Cause  of  Land  Abandonment 

The  two  primary  causes  for  the  decrease  in  productive  power  and 
the  final  agricultural  abandonment  of  vast  areas  of  farm  lands  in  our 
older  states  are  lack  of  knowledge  and  lack  of  profit  in  farming  as 
compared  with  industrial  and  commercial  enterprises.  To  be  sure, 
many  have  become  wealthy  by  holding  title  to  farm  lands  while  they 
increased  rapidly  in  value,  even  while  they  may  have  received  as  farm- 
ers only  a living  and  fixed  expenses,  with  perhaps  smaller  wages  for 
themselves  than  they  paid  their  hired  help.  Of  course  even  3 percent 
interest  on  the  value  of  160  acres  of  $200  land,  received  free  from 
the  government  three  generations  ago,  may  enable  the  present  owner 
to  accumulate  enough  in  a few  years  to  buy  an  automobile,  tho  his 
own  labor  income  may  be  less  than  a dollar  a day;  but  this  does  not 
justify  the  conclusion  that  farming  itself  is  a highly  profitable  busi- 
ness. 

From  1890  to  1910  the  population  of  Illinois  increased  from  3,826,- 
352  to  5,638,529,  but  the  towns  and  cities  received  more  than  100  per- 
cent of  the  total  increase;  while  the  real  country  population  living 
outside  of  all  cities,  towns,  and  villages  decreased  from  1,630,960  to 
1,486,160.  Thus,  owing  chiefly  to  the  growth  of  cities  during  the 
twenty  years,  the  country  population  decreased  from  42.6  percent  to 
26.4  percent  of  the  total  population  of  Illinois ; and  I repeat  that  this 
decrease  of  country  population  is  largely  due  to  lack  of  knowledge 
and  lack  of  profit  in  farming  as  compared  with  industrial  and  com- 
mercial enterprises. 

Southern  Illinois  Lands 

Even  the  central  Illinois  farmer  who  has  had  only  the  privilege  of 
helping  to  wear  out  rich  land  may  not  understand  the  problem,  nor 
appreciate  the  difficulty  and  expense  of  building  up  poor  land,  nor 
realize  the  possibilities  of  changing  the  value  of  southern  Illinois  land 
from  $40  to  $200  an  acre  by  the  application  of  knowledge  and  the  in- 
vestment of  moderate  capital  in  soil  improvement. 

It  so  happens  that  I have  been  in  forty-eight  different  states,  usu- 
ally upon  invitation  to  secure  or  to  impart  some  information  concern- 
ing soils,  soil  problems,  and  rational  methods  of  soil  improvement.  I 
have  at  least  had  opportunity  to  acquire  a somewhat  definite  knowl- 
edge of  many  soils  in  many  states.  During  the  past  year  I carefully 
examined  many  large  areas  of  land,  some  of  which  have  been  almost 
constantly  on  the  market  for  about  two  centuries;  while  some  others 


had  been  farmed  for  two  centuries  and  then  agriculturally  aban- 
doned; and  others  are  still  being  farmed  and  their  owners  are  seek- 
ing for  information  as  to  how  to  improve  them. 

Now  I feel  that  it  is  your  right  and  my  duty  that  I should  state 
to  the  people  here  from  northern  and  central  Illinois,  as  well  as  to 
those  from  this  end  of  the  state,  that  in  my  judgment  there  is  no  bet- 
ter opportunity  in  American  agriculture  for  the  investment  of  money 
and  mind,  of  science  and  sense,  of  brain  and  brawn,  than  in  the  farm 
lands  of  southern  Illinois ; and  I should  add  that  there  are  few  better 
opportunities  in  the  United  States  to  lose  money  in  agricultural  in- 
vestments than  in  the  attempt  to  profit  from  continuing  to  wear  out 
these  same  lands. 

If  you  are  thinking  of  buying  a southern  Illinois  farm  and  are  ex- 
pecting to  make  money  out  of  it  merely  by  cropping  with  good  rota- 
tion and  cultivation,  then  you  are  planning  for  your  own  failure.  I 
realize,  of  course,  that  there  are  northern  farmers  sufficiently  ignorant 
of  southern  Illinois,  or  sufficiently  rich  in  their  own  conceit,  to  think 
that  if  they  could  only  put  their  hand  to  the  plow  they  would  make 
the  southern  Illinois  prairie  produce  the  same  bountiful  crops  as  the 
black  corn-belt  land  produces. 

I know  a landowner  of  central  Illinois  who  bought  a section  of 
the  common  level  upland  in  a county  not  far  from  Saline;  and  he 
imparted  the  secret  that  the  only  farm  difficulty  in  southern  Illinois 
was  that  the  soil  was  ‘ ‘ water-logged, 9 9 and  that  all  it  needed  to  make 
it  the  equal  of  the  $200  corn-belt  land  was  tile-drainage.  The  fact 
that  southern  Illinois  lands  had  been  settled  from  the  beginning  by 
intelligent  white  people,  many  of  whom  had  tried  tile-drainage,  at 
least  in  a small  way,  and  had  derived  little  or  no  benefit  from  it  on 
the  common  upland,  made  no  difference  in  the  opinion  of  this  man; 
and  he  took  but  little  interest  in  the  fact  that  long-continued  careful 
investigations  conducted  by  the  State  University  on  experiment  fields 
in  several  counties  of  southern  Illinois  had  not  yet  shown  sufficient 
benefit  from  tile-drainage  on  the  most  common  upland  soil  to  pay 
interest  on  the  money  invested  in  the  tiling. 

A good  corn-belt  farmer  once  said  to  me  that  all  the  southern  Illi- 
nois land  needs  is  to  grow  clover,  and  thus,  as  he  expressed  it,  “get 
the  yellow  color  out  of  the  soil.”  Another  northern  man  who  held 
the  same  opinion  bought  a farm  of  common  upland  in  southern  Illi- 
nois, and  actually  seeded  clover  and  lost  it  for  twelve  successive  years 
before  he  became  convinced  that  he  had  something  to  learn  about 
growing  clover  in  this  end  of  the  state. 

Common  Commercial  Fertilizers 

If  you  are  trying  to  enrich  your  soil  by  applying  100  to  200 
pounds  per  acre  of  ordinary  commercial  fertilizer,  then  I would  re- 


6 


mind  you  that  you  may  deceive  yourself,  for  a time,  but  you  cannot 
deceive  the  soil.  Don’t  try  to  teach  a cow  how  to  produce  milk  on 
quarter  rations ; she  may  die  before  she  learns  the  secret. 

A boy  found  a drunkard  lying  on  the  sidewalk,  and  he  called  thru 
the  saloon  door  to  the  barkeeper  that  his  sign  had  fallen  down.  Thru 
lack  of  fundamental  knowledge,  the  general  farmer  of  the  East  has 
been  led  to  depend  upon  mixed  commercial  fertilizers,  and  ten  million 
acres  once  classed  as  improved  farm  land  but  now  agriculturally  aban- 
doned represent  the  sign  for  Illinois  farmers  to  look  upon  before 
adopting  the  fertilizer  system  now  so  extensively  advertised  in  the 
Middle  West.  The  commercial  fertilizer  interests,  especially  Eastern 
fertilizer  manufacturers,  after  having  sucked  the  life-blood  out  of 
Eastern  agriculture,  now  seek  new  worlds  to  conquer,  attracted  by  the 
agricultural  earnings  of  the  corn  belt. 

Fertilizers  and  Crops  in  New  England 

The  fertilizer  advocates  boast  that  New  England  produces  larger 
acre-yields  of  certain  cereal  crops,  such  as  corn  and  wheat,  than  are 
produced  in  Illinois ; but  they  ignore  the  fact  'that  44.8  percent  of 
what  was  improved  farm  land  thirty  years  ago  has  been  agricul- 
turally abandoned  in  New  England  under  the  fertilizer  system.  The 
fact  is  that  the  area  devoted  to  cereal  crops  in  New  England  de- 
creased from  746,128  acres  to  only  468,617  acres  during  the  last  thirty 
years.  If  the  production  of  cereal  crops  with  commercial  fertilizers 
is  profitable  in  New  England,  then  why  has  New  England  reduced  her 
area  of  cereals  to  less  than  half  a million  acres  and  agriculturally 
abandoned  5,893,562  acres  of  improved  farm  land?  If  wheat  can  be 
grown  with  profit  by  use  of  mixed  fertilizers  in  New  England,  then 
why  has  the  New  England  wheat  acreage  decreased  from  79,003  acres 
to  only  4,893  acres  in  thirty  years? 

In  New  England  the  area  of  abandoned  land  is  more  than  twelve 
times  the  acreage  of  all  cereal  crops  grown.  Why  does  not  the  Boston 
fertilizer  manufacturer  restore  these  abandoned  lands  and  thus  multi- 
ply the  cereal  production  in  New  England  by  twelve,  instead  of  per- 
mitting this  enormous  shrinkage  at  his  own  door  while  he  sends  broad- 
cast into  the  Middle  West  misleading  advertising  and  thousands  of 
copies  of  letters  to  agricultural  editors,  to  farmers’  institute  lectur- 
ers, to  agricultural  college  teachers,  to  experiment  station  workers, 
to  county  agricultural  advisers,  and  others,  in  the  endeavor  to  secure 
their  influence  to  persuade  our  farmers  to  use  these  same  fertilizers  in 
general  farming? 

Listen, — the  decrease  in  area  of  improved  farm  land  in  New  Eng- 
land since  1880  is  equal  in  acreage  to  the  ten  largest  counties  in  Illi- 
nois ; but  listen, — there  are  five  counties  in  Illinois  any  one  of  which 
produces  more  bushels  of  cereal  crops  than  the  combined  total  cereals 


7 


of  the  six  New  England  states.  These  facts  are  from  the  latest  re- 
ports of  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Census. 

The  truth  is  that  the  corn  and  wheat  of  New  England  are  com- 
monly grown  in  small  patches  in  market  gardens  or  in  feed  lots  con- 
nected with  commercial  dairies.  The  1910  census  reports  186,958  as 
the  total  acreage  of  corn  and  wheat  in  New  England,  while  388,841 
acres  were  used  for  vegetables,  including  potatoes.  In  other  words, 
the  market-garden  crops  occupied  twice  as  much  land  as  corn  and 
wheat,  which  are  grown  more  or  less  after  potatoes  or  other  vegetables 
in  order  to  provide  a rotation  of  crops.  The  vegetable  crops  have,  of 
course,  high  acre-values,  and  mixed  fertilizers  are  used  with  profit  for 
such  crops ; and  furthermore,  such  use  of  commercial  fertilizers  is  and 
always  has  been  approved  and  recommended  by  this  station  and  by 
practically  everybody,  wherever  the  supply  of  farm  manure  is  limited. 

But  to  teach  that  mixed  fertilizers  should  be  used  for  the  growing 
of  corn  in  Illinois  because  of  the  acre-yields  produced  on  highly  fer- 
tilized market-garden  land  when  corn  happens  to  be  used  in  the  rota- 
tion, in  part  to  give  opportunity  to  clean  the  land  of  weeds  by  thoro 
cultivation  of  the  corn,  is  an  attempt  to  deceive  and  mislead  the  Illi- 
nois corn  grower;  and  I repeat  that  in  general  farming  we  should  not 
treat  Illinois  soils  as  most  of  the  soils  have  been  treated  in  the  older 
Eastern  states. 

Fertilizer  Experience  and  Experiments 

Just  now  the  “Try-a-Bag”  propaganda  is  under  way,  and  strenu- 
ous efforts  are  being  made  by  the  fertilizer  interests  to  get  the  corn- 
belt  farmers  at  least  to  “try  a bag.”  This  calls  to  mind  that  we^are 
commonly  urged  to  “try  a package”  of  patent  stockfood,  and  to  “try 
a bottle”  of  patent  medicine;  and  it  all  reminds  us  that  experience  is 
a dear  teacher.  Many  trials  of  mixed  commercial  fertilizers  have  al- 
ready been  made  in  the  Middle  West  states.  Thus,  the  Indiana  Agri- 
cultural Experiment  Station  conducted  seventy-three  cooperative 
trials  with  such  fertilizers,  extending  into  thirty-eight  different  coun- 
ties in  that  state.  The  average  result  shows  13  cents  as  the  farmer  s 
profit  from  each  dollar  paid  for  mixed  complete  fertilizers;  and  of 
course  the  soil  grows  poorer,  because  the  crops  harvested  removed 
much  more  plant  food  than  the  fertilizers  supplied. 

The  Ohio  Experiment  Station  has  for  many  years  conducted  fer- 
tilizer experiments  at  Wooster  with  a five-year  rotation  of  corn,  oats, 
wheat,  clover,  and  timothy,  five  different  fields  or  series  of  plots  being 
used,  so  that  every  crop  might  be  represented  every  year.  As  an  aver- 
age of  eighteen  years’  work,  an  investment  of  $3.96  per  acre  per  an- 
num in  complete  fertilizers  paid  a net  profit  of  $2.61, — and  these  re- 
sults have  been  widely  advertised  and  their  application  strongly  urged 
upon  the  farmers  of  the  corn  belt  by  the  National  Fertilizer  Associa- 


8 


tion ; whereas,  in  the  same  series  of  Ohio  experiments,  52  cents  an  acre 
a year  invested  in  phosphorus  alone  paid  a net  profit  of  $2.79, — and 
this  result,  even  tho  reported  on  the  same  page  of  the  same  Ohio  pub- 
lication,1 was  carefully  ignored  by  the  fertilizer  advertisers.  Why 
spend  $3.96  for  complete  fertilizer  when  52  cents  worth  of  phosphorus 
brings  greater  net  profits  per  acre  ? 

In  the  Breeder’s  Gazette  of  January  21,  1915,  the  “Try-a-Bag” 
propaganda  of  the  manufacturers  of  mixed  commercial  fertilizers  is 
discussed,  and  the  following  conclusions  are  there  presented: 

“We  urge  no  man  who  has  not  satisfied  himself  as  to  commercial  fertilizers 
to  spend  a large  sum  of  money  in  their  purchase  this  spring  or  at  any  other 
time;  but  the  ‘Try-a-Bag7  proposal  of  the  manufacturers  can  not  be  fairly 
criticised.  Their  proposition  to  ‘put  in  a dollar  and  take  out  three 7 can  be 
tried  out  at  trifling  cost.  They  propose  to  make  the  way  easy  this  spring 
for  all  who  wish  to  give  these  goods  a trial.  A bag  or  two  can  do  no  harm, 
and  may  lead  somebody  into  more  profitable  ways.  It  looks  like  an  experiment 
well  worth  while.7 7 

This  is  very  plausible  and  very  falacious  doctrine.  Many  farm- 
ers once  tried  land-plaster  as  a fertilizer.  It  produced  sufficient  in- 
crease to  more  than  pay  the  cost,  and  so  they  continued  to  use  it  until 
they  discovered  after  ten  or  twenty  years  that  what  they  had  counted 
as  profit  was  really  drawn  from  their  own  capital.  Their  increased 
yields  had  been  made  by  robbing  their  own  soil  by  means  of  a stimu- 
lant. 

At  the  famous  Rothamsted  Experiment  Station,  Lawes  and  Gil- 
bert demonstrated  more  than  fifty  years  ago  that  sodium  salt  had 
power  to  increase  the  yield  of  wheat  by  5 bushels  per  acre.  Here, 
too,  the  effect  is  not  at  all  to  enrich  the  soil,  but  to  produce  larger 
crops  temporarily  by  more  rapid  soil  depletion;  for  sodium  does  not 
feed  the  crop,  but  only  forces  the  soil. 

In  1902  the  University  of  Illinois  began  a series  of  field  experi- 
ments in  McLean  county  on  the  common  corn-belt  prairie  land,  whose 
chemical  analysis  showed  less  than  1200  pounds  of  phosphorus  and 
more  than  35,000  pounds  of  potassium  in  the  plowed  soil  of  an  acre. 
The  first  year  phosphorus  alone  produced  6.8  bushels  increase  in  the 
corn  crop,  while  phosphorus  and  potassium  together  gave  15.4  bush- 
els increase.  Thus  the  actual  field  trial  showed  the  “bone  and  potash” 
mixture  to  be  more  than  twice  as  effective  as  phosphorus  alone,  and 
except  for  the  chemical  analysis,  these  results  would  deceive  the  ex- 
perimenter as  well  as  the  farmer.  During  the  first  ten  years,  however, 
phosphorus  increased  the  value  of  crops  grown  on  this  field  by  $76.50 
per  acre,  while  potash  applied  at  the  same  expense  produced  a total 
increase  of  only  86  cents,  its  effect  having  sometimes  been  detrimental 
after  the  earlier  stimulating  action.  Thus,  results  in  continued  farm- 

*01110  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.  Circ.  120.  For  further  discussion  see  Illinois  Experi- 
ment Station  Circular  165. 


9 


ing  by  rational  methods  soon  showed  that  the  first  year’s  trial  was 
very  misleading ; and,  as  already  explained,  the  farmer  can  easily  de- 
ceive himself  for  some  years  if  he  depends  upon  his  own  trial  of  some- 
body’s fertilizer.  A hundred  other  trustworthy  investigations  could 
be  cited  to  show  the  danger  of  putting  into  use  what  may  seem  to  be 
a good  fertilizer  from  the  “try-a-bag”  farmers’  experiment. 

Value  of  Principles  in  Practice 

As  a principle,  it  is  best  to  diagnose  the  case  before  trying  a rem- 
edy. There  are  medicines  that  seem  to  do  good  for  a time,  but  as  an 
1 1 after  effect  ’ ’ they  leave  the  patient  worse  instead  of  better,  the  tem- 
porary strength  being  secured  at  the  expense  of  his  own  vitality.  I 
beg  to  suggest  also  another  principle  that  deserves  consideration; 
namely,  that  it  is  not  sufficient  merely  to  prove  that  an  investment  is 
profitable.  As  already  stated,  the  farmer’s  funds  for  investment  in 
soil  improvement  are  usually  limited ; and  he  should  be  satisfied  that 
the  investment  is  not  only  profitable  but  that  it  is  the  most  profitable, 
and  that  it  does  not  impair  but  protects  his  capital,  which  means  the 
permanent  productive  power  of  his  land. 

The  Illinois  Experiment  Station  has  analyzed  many  thousands  of 
soil  samples  collected  from  all  of  the  more  extensive  soil  types  in  the 
state  by  men  of  special  training  in  this  work;  and  forty  experiment 
fields  are  being  conducted  in  various  parts  of  the  state.  Thousands 
of  the  most  progressive  farmers  of  Illinois  are  already  applying  the 
definite  information  thus  secured  in  the  practical  and  permanent  im- 
provement of  their  soils.  In  other  words,  they  are  placing  their  farm 
practice  upon  a truly  practical  scientific  basis,  with  a satisfying  knowl- 
edge of  the  facts  and  the  principles  involved. 

In  the  older  eastern  states  the  “try-a-bag”  system  has  largely 
prevailed  for  forty  years;  and  ten  million  acres  of  agriculturally 
abandoned  land  in  ten  states  certainly  does  not  indicate  that  the  “try- 
a-bag”  plan  is  likely  to  solve  the  soil  problems  of  the  corn  belt. 

In  the  Middle  West,  not  only  in  Illinois,  but  also  in  Wisconsin 
and  in  many  other  states,  especially  those  west  of  the  Mississippi, 
both  the  farmers  and  the  agricultural  press  are  rightly  depending 
upon  their  experiment  stations — their  own  public-service  institu- 
tions— to  investigate  the  needs  of  the  soil,  in  order  that  agricultural 
practice  may  be  established  upon  a permanent  and  practical  basis; 
and  because  of  the  positive  information  already  secured  with  regard 
to  the  normal  soils  of  the  Middle  West,  the  Breeder’s  Gazette  and 
other  leading  farm  journals  consistently  advocate  the  use  of  ground 
limestone,  phosphorus,  legume  crops,  and  farm  manure,  with  under- 
drainage where  practicable. 

The  common  so-called  “complete”  commercial  fertilizers  contain 
a small  amount  of  each  of  the  three  elements,  nitrogen,  phosphorus, 


10 


and  potassium,  sometimes  incorrectly  reported  as  ammonia,  “phos- 
phoric acid,”  and  potash.  Two  hundred  pounds  of  such  a fertilizer  | 
applied  to  an  acre  at  a cost  of  $2  to  $3  would  furnish  less  than  4 
pounds  of  nitrogen,  8 pounds  of  phosphorus,  and  4 pounds  of  potas- 
sium;  whereas  a 50-bushel  crop  of  corn  would  remove  from  the  soil  j 
75  pounds  of  nitrogen,  12  pounds  of  phosphorus,  and  36  pounds  of 
potassium.  A farm  system  based  upon  such  practice  must  lead  ulti- 
mately to  the  impoverishment  of  the  soil. 

Long-Time  Fertilizer  Experiments 

Attempts  to  produce  the  ordinary  farm  crops  by  supplying  com- 
mercial nitrogen,  phosphorus,  and  potassium  in  approximately  the 
proportions  required  by  the  crops,  have  resulted  in  distinct  loss  for 
nitrogen  and  potassium  but  with  large  profit  for  phosphorus  on  soils 
of  normal  composition. 

Thus  the  Ohio  and  Pennsylvania  Experiment  Stations  have  re- 
ported long-continued  investigations  with  the  use  of  these  different 
elements,  singly  and  in  combination. 

Let  us  consider  in  some  detail  the  Ohio  experiments,  which  have 
now  covered  twenty  years  at  Wooster  and  nineteen  years  at  Strongs- 
ville, as  shown  in  the  latest  published  report,  Ohio  Experiment  Sta- 
tion Circular  No.  144,  dated  April,  1914. 

In  this  circular  (pages  79  and  97)  Director  Thorne  reports  that, 
as  an  average  of  twenty  years  at  Wooster,  $2.60  invested  in  phos- 
phorus paid  the  cost  and  a net  profit  of  $13.92  in  increased  yields  of 
corn,  oats,  wheat,  clover,  and  timothy;  while,  as  an  average  of  nine- 
teen years  at  Strongsville,  $2.60  invested  in  phosphorus  paid  its  cost 
and  a net  profit  of  $14.88.  Thus,  $2.60  in  phosphorus  has  returned  a 
net  profit  of  $14.40,  as  a general  average  of  these  long-time  experi- 
ments on  two  Ohio  Experiment  Station  farms  selected  and  operated 
for  many  years  for  the  benefit  of  Ohio  agriculture. 

On  the  same  pages,  Director  Thorne  reports  that  $14.40  invested 
in  nitrogen  (applied  in  addition  to  the  phosphorus)  paid  42  cents 
above  its  cost  at  Wooster  and  $10.40  less  than  its  cost  at  Strongsville, 
making  an  average  net  loss  of  $4.99. 

Again,  Director  Thorne  reports  on  these  same  pages  that  $6.50  in- 
vested in  potash  (applied  in  addition  to  the  phosphorus  and  nitrogen) 
paid  $1.44  above  its  cost  at  Wooster  and  $4.27  less  than  its  cost  at 
Strongsville,  making  an  average  net  loss  of  $1.41. 

As  a general  average  of  these  Ohio  data,  for  each  dollar  invested 
in  the  respective  elements,  phosphorus  paid  back  $6.54,  nitrogen  (in 
addition  to  phosphorus)  paid  back  65  cents,  and  potassium  (applied 
in  addition  to  both  phosphorus  and  nitrogen)  paid  back  78  cents. 
Each  of  these  figures  represents  the  gross  returns  for  a dollar  in- 
vested, and  each  is  based  upon  the  average  results  from  nearly  two 


11 


hundred  harvested  crops.  The  35  percent  loss  for  nitrogen  and  22 
percent  for  potassium  represent  average  net  losses. 

I have  seen  no  recent  detailed  report  of  the  long-continued  Penn- 
sylvania experiments  at  State  College,  but  I do  have  the  complete 
data  for  the  twenty-four  years  from  1885  to  1908.  If  we  follow  one 
method  used  by  the  Pennsylvania  Station  in  computing  the  increase, — 
the  same  method  as  is  used  by  Director  Thorne  of  Ohio,  as  well  as  by 
myself, — and  count  12  cents  a pound  for  phosphorus  (about  5 cents 
for  so-called  “phosphoric  acid”),  6 cents  a pound  for  potassium 
(about  5 cents  for  potash),  and  15  cents  a pound  for  nitrogen  (about 
12  cents  for  ammonia)  ; and  then  value  the  crops,  standing  in  the 
field  ready  for  harvest,  at  50  cents  a bushel  for  corn,  43  cents  for 
oats,  $1  for  wheat,  and  $8.60  a ton  for  hay  (mixed  clover  and  tim- 
othy), we  find,  as  an  average  of  96  crop  yields  (each  of  the  above- 
named  crops  in  a four-year  rotation  for  twenty-four  years),  that,  for 
every  dollar  invested  in  the  respective  elements,  phosphorus  paid  back 
$3.44,  nitrogen  (in  addition  to  phosphorus)  paid  back  $1.01,  and 
potassium  (applied  in  addition  to  both  phosphorus  and  nitrogen) 
paid  back  6 cents  (average  of  Plots  9 and  17). 

Thus,  as  a general  average  of  these  results  from  two  states,  we 
have  a gross  return  of  83  cents  for  nitrogen  and  42  cents  for  potas- 
sium for  each  dollar  spent  for  these  elements  under  the  conditions 
specified,  while  each  dollar  spent  for  phosphorus  paid  back  $4.99. 

On  page  91  of  Ohio  Circular  144,  Director  Thorne  reports  results 
from  soil  experiments  at  Wooster  covering  seventeen  years  with  a 
three-year  rotation  of  corn,  wheat,  and  clover  (excluding  the  corn 
crop  of  1909).  He  shows  that  80  pounds  of  acid  phosphate,  80  pounds 
of  muriate  of  potash,  and  160  pounds  of  nitrate  of  soda,  costing  $7.45, 
paid  back  $10.71  gross;  but  that  when  the  phosphorus  was  increased 
and  the  potassium  and  nitrogen  reduced,  by  the  use  of  80  pounds  of 
acid  phosphate,  10  pounds  of  muriate  of  potash,  and  100  pounds  of 
7-30  tankage,  the  cost  was  reduced  to  $2.30,  but  the  gross  returns 
were  increased  to  $11.21.  Whether  the  crop  returns  would  have  been 
rendered  still  more  profitable  by  further  increasing  the  phosphorus 
and  by  eliminating  the  remaining  4 pounds  of  potassium  and  6 pounds 
of  nitrogen  per  acre  (applied  once  in  three  years)  is  not  fully  estab- 
lished ; but  Director  Thorne  reports  that  $2.24  invested  in  320  pounds 
of  acid  phosphate,  applied  in  addition  to  farm  manure  in  this  same 
series  of  experiments,  produced  an  average  increase  of  $15.04,  and  that 
the  same  amount  of  acid  phosphate  when  used  by  itself  in  the  five-year- 
rotation  experiments  at  Wooster  increased  the  crop  value  by  $16.52. 

These  are  not  my  computations,  but  those  of  the  Ohio  Experiment 
Station,  as  may  easily  be  verified.  They  are  surely  convincing  as  to 
the  value  of  phosphorus,  but  they  afford  no  such  support  for  the  con- 
tention that  at  least  a little  nitrogen  and  a little  potash  should  be 


12 


purchased  and  applied  with  the  phosphorus  for  the  production  of 
staple  farm  crops  on  the  normal  soils  of  Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  and  the 
Middle  West. 

While  there  are  some  trials,  as  mentioned  above,  in  which  nitrogen 
and  potash  seem  to  have  paid  their  cost  and  some  interest  on  the  in- 
vestment, yet  when  full  consideration  is  given  to  these  long-time  ex- 
periments at  State  College,  Wooster,  and  Strongsville,  they  clearly 
do  not  show  the  greatest  profit  when  commercial  nitrogen  and  potash 
are  included  in  the  fertilizer. 

Thus,  on  Plot  11  at  Wooster  $20.90  spent  for  nitrogen  and  potash 
paid  back  $1.86  above  the  original  cost  for  the  five-year  rotation,  but 
6 percent  interest  on  $20.90  for  half  of  five  years  would  amount  to 
$3.13.  Moreover,  for  sixteen  years  Plot  27  received  the  same  com- 
plete fertilizer  as  Plot  11,  unless  we  count  that  acid  phosphate  made 
from  bone  black  (used  on  Plot  27)  is  essentially  different  from  that 
made  from  rock  phosphate.  As  an  average  of  the  sixteen  years,  the  net 
profits  reported  by  Director  Thorne  in  Ohio  Circular  104  were  $13.88 
from  $2.60  in  phosphorus  alone,  $15.83  from  $23.50  in  complete  fer- 
tilizer on  Plot  11,  and  $10.34  from  $23.50  in  the  complete  fertilizer 
on  Plot  27 ; thus  giving  an  average  net  profit  of  $13.09  from  $23.50 
in  the  complete  fertilizer,  compared  with  a net  profit  of  $13.88  from 
$2.60  in  phosphorus  alone. 

Of  course  we  must  not  draw  conclusions  from  Plot  11  and  ignore 
Plot  27  in  the  same  series  of  experiments,  nor  should  we  emphasize 
results  from  Wooster  and  ignore  those  from  Strongsville,  all  reported 
by  Director  Thorne  in  the  same  publication  (Ohio  Circular  144). 

Kational  Soil  Improvement 

On  abnormal  soils,  such  as  the  peaty  swamp  lands  of  the  North 
Central  states  and  the  sandy  soils  of  the  Atlantic  and  Gulf  Coastal 
Plains,  potassium  should  be  regularly  supplied  in  systems  of  soil  im- 
provement. In  Illinois  a very  large  part  of  the  commercial  potassium 
used  is  for  the  improvement  of  peaty  swamp  lands,  following  the  con- 
clusive information  secured  by  the  Illinois  Experiment  Station  dur- 
ing the  past  dozen  years.  (See  Bulletin  157.) 

The  facts  are  that  the  air  contains  an  inexhaustible  supply  of 
nitrogen,  and  the  normal  soil  contains  an  inexhaustible  supply  of 
potassium, — from  25,000  to  50,000  pounds  in  the  plowed  soil  of  an 
acre  of  the  common  soils  of  Illinois,  the  only  exceptions  found  being 
the  peaty  swamp  lands  and  some  limited  areas  of  residual  sand.  Thus 
the  problem  with  nitrogen  is  to  get  it  from  the  air  by  means  of  legume 
crops ; and  the  problem  with  potassium  is  to  liberate  it  as  needed  from 
the  soil  by  means  of  decaying  organic  matter,  such  as  crop  residues 
and  farm  manure. 

As  a rule,  limestone  must  be  purchased  and  applied,  because  most 


13 


Illinois  soils  are  acid,  or  sour,  and  the  most  valuable  legume  crops  will 
not  thrive  on  sour  soils.  As  a common  rule,  also,  Illinois  soils  are 
poor  in  phosphorus;  and  hence  most  upland  soil  should  be  liberally 
enriched  in  phosphorus,  altho  this  is  not  necessary  on  the  rolling  hill 
lands  where  sufficient  erosion  is  sure  to  occur  so  that  the  subsoil  re- 
news the  surface  supply. 

Thus  the  golden  tripod  for  the  man  who  farms  with  both  head  and 
hand,  on  normal  soil,  is  not  the  commercial  nitrogen,  “ phosphoric 
acid,  ’ ’ and  potash,  of  the  fertilizer  sack,  but  ground  natural  limestone, 
legume  crops  grown  upon  the  farm,  and  some  form  of  phosphorus,  the 
fine-ground  natural  rock  phosphate  probably  being  most  practical  in 
permanent  economic  systems.  Kainit  is  sometimes  helpful  at  least  tem- 
porarily, but  it  is  not  essential  and  is  not  likely  to  be  profitable  when 
sufficient  limestone  and  organic  matter  are  provided. 

Soil  Experiments  in  Southern  Illinois 

I wish  now  to  call  attention  to  the  complete  data  thus  far  secured 
from  the  soil  experiment  fields  which  have  been  conducted  by  the 
University  of  Illinois  for  the  past  five  years  at  Ewing,  Franklin 
county,  on  the  ordinary  prairie  land,  and  at  Raleigh,  Saline  county, 
on  the  common  upland  timber  soil  of  southern  Illinois. 

It  should  be  kept  in  mind  in  connection  with  these  results,  first, 
that  the  wheat  crop  of  1912  was  commonly  a failure  in  this  state,  and 
that  the  drouths  of  1913  and  1914  were  perhaps  the  most  severe  ever 
known  in  two  consecutive  years  in  southern  Illinois ; and  second,  that 
even  slight  variations  in  the  topography,  drainage,  and  quality  of 
land,  combined  with  possible  irregular  injuries  from  rodents,  insects, 
plant  diseases,  et  cetera,  may  produce  local  or  temporary  differences 
in  crop  yields,  and  hence  that  no  conclusions  should  be  drawn  from 
field  experiments  until  the  results  are  fully  verified. 

At  the  beginning  of  these  experiments,  ground  limestone  (L)  was 
applied  at  the  rate  of  5 tons  per  acre  at  Ewing  and  6 tons  per  acre  at 
Raleigh,  but  the  regular  subsequent  applications  will  be  2 tons  per 
acre  every  four  years,  beginning  in  1915  at  Ewing  and  in  1917  at 
Raleigh. 

Rock  phosphate  (P)  was  applied  at  rates  varying  from  500  to  2000 
pounds  per  acre  on  the  different  series  at  the  beginning,  with  subse- 
quent applications  of  2000  pounds  every  four  years,  altho  this  may 
ultimately  be  reduced  to  one-fourth  of  this  amount. 

The  kainit  (K)  was  applied  at  the  beginning  at  rates  varying  from 
200  to  800  pounds  per  acre  on  the  different  series,  with  subsequent 
applications  of  800  pounds  every  four  years. 

Farm  manure  (M)  has  been  applied,  beginning  for  1911,  in  such 
amounts  as  could  be  produced  from  the  crops  grown  the  previous  sea- 
son. 


14 


The  crop  residues  (R)  returned  to  certain  plots  consist  of  com 
stalks,  the  straw  of  wheat  and  oats,  and  of  cowpeas  or  soybeans,  all 
clover  except  the  seed,  and  some  cover  crops. 

The  limestone  to  some  extent,  and  the  phosphate  to  a large  extent, 
should  be  considered  as  additions  to  the  cost  or  value  of  the  land. 
Thus,  6 tons  of  limestone  costing  $12  spread  on  the  land  and  1 ton  of 
phosphate  costing  $8  would  add  $20  an  acre  to  the  cost  of  the  land. 
To  pay  interest  on  these  investments  and  on  the  additional  applica- 
tions for  maintenance  would  require  per  acre  per  annum  about  $1.25 
for  limestone  and  $1  for  phosphate,  while  the  annual  expense  for  200 
pounds  of  kainit  at  $15  per  ton  would  amount  to  $1.50  per  acre;  or, 
as  the  annual  expense  for  the  four  crops  (1  acre  each)  we  may  count 
$5  for  limestone,  $4  for  phosphate,  and  $6  for  kainit,  understanding 
that  these  amounts  will  vary  with  freight  rates,  with  the  distance  of 
the  farm  from  the  railway  station,  and  with  changes  in  prices. 

In  the  tabular  statements  presented  (Tables  1 to  10),  the  prices 
allowed  for  the  increase  produced  are  70  cents  and  $1  a bushel  for 
wheat,  35  and  50  cents  for  corn,  28  and  40  cents  for  oats,  70  cents 
and  $1  for  cowpeas  or  soybeans,  $7  and  $10  for  clover  seed,  and  $7 
and  $10  a ton  for  hay.  Of  course  the  lower  values  are  very  conserva- 
tive prices,  and  perhaps  they  are  too  low — some  would  advise  that 
they  be  doubled ; but  it  should  be  stated  that  they  are  prices  for  crops 
standing  in  the  field  before  harvest,  and  that  higher  prices  would  have 
to  be  secured  to  pay  for  harvesting,  stacking,  baling,  threshing,  stor- 
ing, and  marketing,  and  for  possible  losses.  The  treatment  applied  to 
the  soil  does  not  deliver  the  increased  produce  at  the  market,  but  only 
ready  for  the  harvest.  The  double  system  of  computing  values  is  used 
to  emphasize  the  influence  that  may  be  exerted  upon  farm  practice  by 
the  prices  received  for  farm  produce. 

The  ten  tabular  statements  show  all  the  yields  secured  during  the 
five  years,  and  give  the  financial  results  of  twenty  trials  with  lime- 
stone, twenty  with  phosphate,  and  ten  with  kainit,  each  trial  repre- 
senting a season’s  record  with  four  crops. 

On  the  basis  of  the  lower  values  named,  the  limestone  failed  to  pay 
its  annual  cost  the  first  year  in  the  residue  system  and  during  the 
first  two  seasons  in  the  live-stock  system  of  farming,  on  the  field  at 
Ewing;  but  in  the  other  seventeen  trials  it  always  paid  a profit;  and, 
as  an  average  of  the  twenty  trials,  limestone  estimated  to  cost  $5  a 
year  has  returned  $12.69  in  the  increased  yield  of  four  crops.  Or,  if 
we  count  $2  a ton  as  the  cost  of  the  limestone  spread  on  the  land,  then 
the  average  initial  expense  for  Ewing  and  Raleigh  is  $11  per  acre, 
while  the  return  for  the  first  five  years  is  $15.86, — and  it  is  safe  to 
say  that  half  the  value  of  the  limestone  still  remains  in  the  soil  for 
the  benefit  of  future  crops. 

In  only  three  cases  out  of  twenty  has  the  phosphate  paid  its  esti- 
mated annual  cost  of  $4  for  four  acres,  but  the  average  annual  re- 


15 


turn  of  $1.03  for  the  first  three  years  and  $2.54  for  the  last  two  are 
suggestive  of  progress.  These  results  only  confirm  those  of  many 
other  experiments,  which  have  led  me  always  to  counsel  against  the 
use  of  raw  phosphate  except  in  connection  with  plenty  of  decaying 
organic  matter.  The  Experiment  Station  constantly  advises  southern 
Illinois  farmers  first  to  make  liberal  use  of  limestone,  legume  crops, 
and  organic  manure,  even  tho  they  delay  the  addition  of  phosphorus 
for  several  years. 

In  three  cases  out  of  ten  the  kainit  has  paid  its  annual  cost  of  $6, 


Table  1. — Crop  Yields  in  Soil  Experiments,  Ewing  Field,  1910 
Gray  Silt  Loam  on  Tight  Clay  (Prairie  Soil) 

(Yields  per  acre) 


Series 

100 

200 

300 

400 

Value  of  four 
crops 

Value  for  each 
addition 

Plot 

Treat- 

Wheat, 

Cowpeas, 

Oats, 

Corn, 

Lower 

Higher 

Lower 

Higher 

No. 

ment 

bu. 

tons 

bu. 

bu. 

prices 

prices 

prices 

prices 

1 

0 

10.4 

.89 

37.1 

30.8 

$34.68 

$49.54 

2 

*M 

14.2 

.97 

43.1 

35.1 

41.08 

58.69 

3 

*ML 

9.9 

1.05 

42.6 

36.4 

38.95 

55.64 

L 

-$2.13 

-$3.05 

4 

*MLP 

8.0 

1.19 

45.3 

40.4 

40.75 

58.22 

P 

1.80 

2.58 

5 

0 

6.8 

1.02 

32.8 

37.3 

34.13 

48.77 

6 

*R 

8.6 

Turned 

37.8 

38.4 

30.04 

42.92 

7 

*RL 

8.5 

Turned 

39.2 

51.7 

35.02 

50.03 

L 

4.98 

7.11 

8 

*RLP 

10.7 

Turned 

35.6 

50.7 

35.20 

50.29 

P 

.18 

.26 

9 

*RLPK 

17.9 

Turned 

~36.7 

47.6 

39.47 

56.38 

K 

4.27 

6.09 

10 

0 

9.7 

.87 

44.2 

43.6 

40.52 

57.88 

*No  manure  or  crop  residues  for  1910. 


Table  2.— Crop  Yields  in  Soil  Experiments,  Ewing  Field,  1911 
Gray  Silt  Loam  on  Tight  Clay  (Prairie  Soil) 

(Yields  per  acre) 


Series 

*100 

200 

300 

400 

Value  of  four 
crops 

Value  for  each 
addition 

Plot 

Treat- 

Corn, 

Wheat, 

Cowpeas, 

Oats, 

Lower 

Higher 

Lower 

Higher 

No. 

ment 

bu. 

bu. 

tons(bu.) 

bu. 

prices 

prices 

prices 

prices 

1 

0 

16.2 

10.7 

.25 

17.7 

$19.88 

$28.38 

2 

26.8 

12.8 

.23 

29.2 

28.12 

40.18 

M 

$3.71 

$5.30 

3 

*ML 

27.5 

17.3 

.34 

31.3 

32.88 

46.97 

L 

4.76 

6.79 

4 

*MLP 

30.2 

23.8 

.38 

32.0 

38.85 

55.50 

P 

5.97 

8.53 

5 

0 

12.7 

11.9 

(1.6) 

23.9 

1 20.59 

29.41 

6 

R 

13.2 

9.9 

(1.2) 

21.8 

18.49 

26.42 

R 

-2.10 

-2.99 

7 

RL 

23.0 

20.5- 

(2.4) 

42.7 

36.03 

51.48 

L 

17.54 

25.06 

8 

RLP 

20.8 

23.7 

(3.2) 

36.7 

36.39 

51.98 

P 

.36 

.50 

9 

RLPK 

26.0 

28.1 

(4.0) 

42.8 

43.55 

62.22 

K 

6.16 

10.24 

10 

0 

15.8 

12.0 

(1.3) 

23.9 

21.53 

30.76 

' 

Manure  on  Series  100  only. 


16 


but  tbe  average  animal  return  of  $3.85  for  the  first  three  years  and  of 
$3.74  for  the  last  two  suggest  a decreasing  effect,  as  would  be  expected 
from  rational  systems  with  increasing  use  of  organic  manures  pro- 
duced upon  the  farm.  It  may  be  noted,  however,  that  the  effect  of 
kainit  shows  a decrease  only  on  the  timber  soil,  at  Raleigh,  while  at 
Ewing,  on  the  prairie  land,  kainit  has  paid  its  estimated  annual  cost 
and  still  shows  increasing  benefit. 

If  we  compute  the  value  of  the  increase  in  crops  at  the  present 
market  prices,  both  the  phosphate  and  the  kainit  would  show  profit 


Table  3. — Crop  Yields  in  Soil  Experiments,  Ewing  Eield,  1912 
Gray  Silt  Loam  on  Tight  Clay  (Prairie  Soil) 

(Yields  per  acre) 


Series 

*100 

*200 

300 

400 

Value  of  four 
crops 

Value  for  each 
addition 

Plot 

Treat- 

Oats, 

Corn, 

Wheat, 

Cowpeas, 

Lower 

Higher 

Lower 

Higher 

No. 

ment 

bu. 

bu. 

bu. 

tons 

prices 

prices 

prices 

prices 

1 

0 

12.0 

24.7 

1.8 

.76 

$18.59 

$26.55  i 

2 

*M 

19.1 

39.8 

2.3 

.66 

25.50 

36.44 

M 

$7.27 

$10,39 

3 

*ML 

28.3 

52.1 

4.9 

1.26 

38.40 

54.87 

L 

12.90 

18.43 

4 

*MLP 

34.4 

50.7 

3.0 

1.38 

39.13 

55.91 

P 

.73 

1.04 

~ 5" 

0 

14.4 

~so7f~ 

.8 

.90 

21.63 

30.91 

6 

R 

16.4 

33.1 

.8 

Turned 

16.73 

23.91 

R 

-4.90 

-7.00 

7 

RL 

30.8 

48.3 

4.3 

Turned 

28.53 

40.77 

L 

11.80 

16.86 

8 

RLP 

33.4 

45.0 

3.2 

Turned 

27.34 

39.06 

P 

-1.19 

-1.71 

9 

RLPK 

37.2 

51.5 

4.3 

Turned 

31.45 

44.93 

K 

4.11 

4.87 

10 

0 

11.4 

31.7 

2.8 

No  wt. 

16.24 

23.21 

*Manure  on  Series  200  for  1912. 


Table  4. — Crop  Yields  in  Soil  Experiments,  Ewing  Field,  1913 
Gray  Silt  Loam  on  Tight  Clay  (Prairie  Soil) 

(Yields  per  acre) 


Series 

*100 

*200 

*300 

400 

Value  of  four 
crops 

Value  for  each 
addition 

Plot 

Treat- 

Clover, 

Oats, 

Corn, 

Wheat, 

Lower 

Higher 

Lower 

Higher 

No. 

ment 

tons  (bu.) 

bu. 

bu. 

bu. 

prices 

prices 

prices 

prices 

~Y 

0 

.20 

1.7 

6.0 

.8 

$4.53 

$6.48 

2 

.24 

3.9 

10.3 

.8 

6.93 

9.91 

M 

$2.40 

$3.43 

3 

*ML 

.40 

7.3 

20.8 

11.8 

20.38 

29.12 

L 

13.45 

19.21 

4 

*MLP 

.81 

6.9 

23.9 

11.3 

23.88 

34.11 

P 

3.50 

4.99 

5 

0 

.19 

.6 

5.6 

.9 

4.09 

5.84 

6 

R 

(.00) 

2.5 

6.2 

1.1 

3.64 

5.20 

R 

- .45 

- .64 

7 

RL 

(.50) 

8.4 

22.5 

16.0 

24.92 

35.61 

L 

21.28 

30.41 

8 

RLP 

(1.08) 

9.2 

21.8 

14.9 

28.20 

40.28 

P 

3.28 

4.67 

9 

RLPK 

(.75) 

12.5 

~26.8“ 

27.2 

37.17 

53.10 

K 

8.97 

12.82 

10 

0 

.31 

3.3 

6.1 

2.5 

6.98 

9.97 

*Manure  on  Series  300  for  19130 


17 


during  the  later  years  of  the  experiments,  but  this  would  require  the 
farmer  to  work  for  about  as  low  wages  in  the  improvement  of  his  soil 
as  he  usually  receives  in  the  practice  of  soil  depletion. 

As  an  average  of  both  fields  for  the  last  four  years,  the  value  of 
the  increase  from  four  acres  has  been  $3.84  from  farm  manure,  $14.41 
from  residues  and  limestone,  and  $17.52  from  manure  and  limestone. 
To  these  amounts  the  phosphate  has  added  $2  with  the  residues  and 
$1.81  with  the  manure.  The  kainit  (used  only  in  the  residue  system) 
has  made  a further  increase  of  $3.97. 


Table  5. — Crop  Yields  in  Soil  Experiments,  Ewing  Field,  1914 
Gray  Silt  Loam  on  Tight  Clay  (Prairie  Soil) 

(Yields  per  acre) 


Series 

100 

200 

300 

400 

Value  of  four 
crops 

Value  for  each 
addition 

Plot 

Treat- 

Wheat, 

Soybeans, 
tons  (bit.) 

Oats, 

Corn, 

Lower 

Higher 

Lower 

Higher 

No. 

ment 

bu. 

bu. 

bu. 

prices 

prices 

prices 

prices 

0 

1.7 

.27 

3.0 

4.3 

$5.42 

$7.75 

2 

M 

3.4 

.23 

3.4 

4.5 

6.51 

9.31 

M 

$1.09 

$1.56 

3 

ML 

16.2 

.47 

5.6 

7.6 

18.86 

26.94 

L 

12.35 

17.63 

4 

MLP 

22.5 

.53 

6.4 

6.3 

23.46 

33.51 

P 

4.60 

6.57 

T 

0 

.9 

(2.0) 

1.4 

3.5 

3.64 

5.21 

6 

R 

.8 

(2.3) 

3.3 

2.7 

4.03 

5.77 

R 

.39 

.56 

7 

RL 

12.8 

(4.0) 

5.9 

3.1 

14.50 

20.71 

L 

10.47 

14.94 

8 

RLP 

17.6 

(4.0) 

5.3 

3.6 

17.86 

25.52 

P 

3.36 

4.81 

~~9~ 

RLPK 

25.8 

(4.2) 

6.6 

6.4 

25.09 

35.84 

K 

7.23 

10.32 

10 

0 

1.2 

(2.0) 

1.4 

2.7 

3.58 

5.11 

Table  6. — Crop  Yields  in  Soil  Experiments,  Raleigh  Field,  1910 
Yellow-gray  Silt  Loam  (Timber  Soil) 

(Yields  per  acre) 


Series 

100 

to 

o 

o 

300 

400 

Value  of  four 
crops 

Value  for  each 
addition 

Plot 

Treat- 

Wheat, Cowpeas, 

Oats, 

Corn, 

Lower 

Higher 

Lower 

Higher 

No. 

ment 

bu. 

tons 

bu. 

bu. 

prices 

prices 

prices 

prices 

1 

0 

9.5 

.86 

18.1 

24.1 

$26.17 

$37.39 

2 

*M 

6.9 

.75 

17.3 

18.1 

21.26 

30.37 

3 

*ML 

9.8 

1.38 

26.8 

40.1 

38.06 

54.37 

L 

$16.80 

$24.00 

4 

*MLP 

11.6 

1.35 

26.0 

37.4 

37.94 

54.20 

P 

- .12 

- .17 

5 

0 

7.3 

.74 

15dT 

24.9 

23.20 

33.15 

6 

*R 

9.0 

Turned 

20.9 

31.1 

23.03 

32.91 

7 

*RL 

11.0 

Turned 

25.1 

42.8 

29.70 

42.44 

L 

6.67 

9.53 

8 

*RLP 

10.7* 

Turned 

25.1 

44.5 

30.09 

42.99 

P 

.39 

.55 

9 

*RLPK 

12.7 

Turned 

29.3 

43.0 

32.14 

45.92 

K 

2.05 

2.93 

10 

0 

5.7 

1.09 

22.9 

26.8 

27.41 

39.16 

*No  manure  or  crop  residues  for  1910. 


18 


To  summarize  more  briefly,  the  average  annual  returns  of  the  last 
four  years  from  four  acres  with  crops  grown  in  rotation  on  untreated 
land  were  $15.19  (or  $21.70  with  the  higher  values)  ; the  value  of  the 
increase  from  manure,  limestone,  and  phosphate  was  $19.33  (or 
$27.61)  ; while  $20.38  (or  $29.11)  was  the  value  of  the  increase  from 
the  residues,  limestone,  phosphate,  and  kainit,  altho  the  crop  residues 
alone  gave  insufficient  increase  to  balance  the  extra  crops  harvested 
from  the  check  plot.  (So  far  as  practical,  the  crop  residues  are  left 
on  the  land  so  as  to  avoid  hauling  them  off  and  back.) 


Table  7. — Crop  Yields  in  Soil  Experiments,  Ealeigh  Field,  1911 
Yellow-gray  Silt  Loam  (Timber  Soil) 

(Yields  per  acre) 


Series 

*100 

200 

300 

400 

Value  of  four 
crops 

Value  for  each 
addition 

Plot 

Treat- 

Corn, 

Wheat, 

Clover, 

Oats, 

Lower 

Higher 

Lower 

Higher 

No. 

ment 

bu. 

bu. 

tons 

bu. 

prices 

prices 

prices 

prices 

1 

0 

28.0 

12.1 

.44 

25.6 

$28.51 

$40.74 

2 

*M 

41.0 

12.7 

.43 

19.2 

31.62 

45.18 

M 

$4.55 

$6.50 

3 

*ML 

45.8 

17.5 

.61 

38.0 

43.19 

61.70 

L 

11.57 

16.52 

4 

*MLP 

46.7 

19.0 

.68 

35.5 

44.34 

63.35 

P 

1.15 

1.65 

5 

0 

24.9 

9.5 

.23 

18.4 

22.12 

31.61 

6 

E 

24.4 

12.3 

Turned 

24.1 

23.90 

34.14 

E 

1.78 

2.53 

7 

EL 

36.8 

19.9 

Turned 

38.6 

37.61 

53.74 

L 

13.71 

19.60 

8 

ELP 

31.1 

22.7 

Turned 

35.3 

36.66 

52.37 

P 

- .95 

-1.37 

9 

ELPK 

39.5 

22.8 

Turned 

32.8 

38.97 

55.67 

K 

2.31 

3.30 

10 

0 

17.8 

14.7 

No  wt. 

25.0 

23.52 

33.60 

*Manure  on  Series  100  only. 


Table  8. — Crop  Yields  in  Soil  Experiments,  Ealeigh  Field,  1912 
Yellow-gray  Silt  Loam  (Timber  Soil) 

(Yields  per  acre) 


Series 

* 

i—* 

o 

° 

o 

o 

CM 

300 

400 

Value  of  four 
crops 

Value  for  each 
addition 

Plot 

Treat- 

Oats, 

Corn, 

Wheat, 

Cowpeas, 

Lower 

Higher 

Lower 

Higher 

No. 

ment 

bu. 

bu. 

bu. 

tons 

prices 

prices 

prices 

prices 

1 

0 

11.9 

20.5 

~~3A 

1.44 

$22.97 

$32.81 

2 

*M 

15.2 

36.5 

2.3 

1.05 

25.99 

37.13 

M 

$6.52 

$9.32 

3 

*ML 

23.4 

55.1 

7.1 

2.79 

50.33 

71.91 

L 

24.34 

34.78 

4 

*MLP 

22.7 

53.9 

7.8 

2.56 

48.60 

69.43 

P 

-1.73 

-2.48 

5 

0 

14.1 

20.4 

2.0 

.93 

19.00 

27.14 

6 

E 

12.8 

29.9 

2.8 

Turned 

16.00 

22.87 

E 

-3.00 

-4.27 

7 

EL 

20.9 

45.2 

7.4 

Turned 

26.85 

38.36 

L 

10.85 

15.49 

8 

ELP 

23.0 

55.1 

9.9 

Turned 

32.65 

46.65 

P 

5.80 

8.29 

9 

ELPK 

25.8 

56.5 

14.1 

Turned 

36.87 

52.67 

K 

4.22 

6.02 

10 

0 

8.1 

25.2 

4.7 

No  wt. 

14.38 

20.54 

*Manure  on  Series  200  for  1912. 


19 


These  are  the  results  from  1911  to  1914,  after  one  season’s  crops 
had  been  grown  to  enable  us  to  begin  the  application  of  manure  and 
the  turning  under  of  some  crop  residues ; and  it  should  be  clearly  un- 
derstood that  the  increasing  benefit  of  limestone  and  phosphate  is  in 
part  due  to  the  increasing  amounts  of  organic  matter  returned  to 
those  plots  as  compared  with  plots  receiving  residues  or  manure  alone. 
Of  course  we  may  reasonably  expect  better  results  during  the  second 
rotation  of  crops,  in  part  because  of  the  cumulative  effect  of  the  phos- 
phate and  organic  matter  and  in  part  because  the  seasonal  conditions 


Table  9. — Crop  Yields  in  Soil  Experiments,  Raleigh  Field,  1913 
Yellow-gray  Silt  Loam  (Timber  Soil) 

(Yields  per  acre) 


Series 

o 

o 

r-l 

* 

*200 

*300 

400 

Value  of  four 
crops 

Value  for  each 
addition 

Plot 

Treat- 

Clover, 

Oats, 

Corn, 

Wheat, 

Lower 

Higher 

Lower 

Higher 

No. 

ment 

tons 

bu. 

bu. 

bu. 

prices 

prices 

prices 

prices 

1 

0 

.22 

.6 

5.7 

6.2 

$8.04 

$11.49 

2 

*M 

.23 

2.0 

12.9 

4.2 

9.62 

13.75 

M 

$2.98 

$4.26 

3 

*ML 

.72 

3.1 

17.2 

20.7 

26.41 

37.74 

L 

16.79 

23.99 

4 

|*MLP 

.68 

3.0 

17.1 

23.8 

28.24 

40.35 

P 

1.83 

2.61 

5 

0 

No  wt. 

1.7 

4.5 

6.4 

6.70 

9.58 

6 

R 

Turned 

2.0 

9.4 

8.5 

9.80 

14.00 

R 

3.10 

4.42 

7 

RL 

Turned 

4.4 

17.5 

29.8 

28.21 

40.31 

L 

18.41 

26.31 

8 

RLP 

Turned 

5.2 

17.9 

32.9 

30.75 

43.93 

P 

2.54 

3.62 

9 

RLPK 

Turned 

7.2 

15.9 

29.8 

28.44 

40.63 

K 

-2.31 

-3.30 

10 

0 

No  wt. 

2.7 

7.4 

4.7 

6.63 

9.48 

*Manure  on  Series  300  for  1913. 


Table  10. — Crop  Yields  in  Soil  Experiments,  Raleigh  Field,  1914 
Yellow-gray  Silt  Loam  (Timber  Soil) 

(Yields  per  acre) 


Series 

100 

200 

300 

400 

Value  of  four 
crops 

Value  for  each 
addition 

Plot 

Treat- 

Wheat, 

Soybeans, 

Oats, 

Corn, 

Lower 

Higher 

Lower 

Higher 

No. 

ment 

bu. 

tons(bu.) 

bu. 

bu. 

prices 

prices 

prices 

prices 

1 

0 

11.8 

.28 

2.5 

7.6 

$13.58 

$19.40 

2 

M 

10.9 

.30 

5.0 

13.2 

15.75 

22.50 

M 

$2.17 

$3.10 

3 

ML 

27.5 

.26 

8.1 

16.3 

29.04 

41.49 

L 

13.29 

18.99 

4 

MLP 

26.8 

.23 

7.8 

14.1 

27.49 

39.27 

P 

-1.55 

-2.22 

5 

0 

9.4 

(.7) 

2.0 

8.5 

10.60 

15.15 

6 

R 

9.2 

(2.5) 

4.1 

10.7 

13.08 

18.69 

R 

2.48 

3.54 

7 

RL 

25.1 

(2.5) 

9.5 

14.4' 

27.02 

38.60 

L 

13.94 

19.91 

8 

RLP 

27.2 

(2.7) 

11.2 

16.4 

29.80 

42.58 

P 

2.78 

3.98 

9 

RLPK 

30.0 

(1.8) 

10.3 

16.4 

30.88 

44.12 

K 

1.08 

1.54 

10 

0 

7.2 

(.7) 

5.0 

4.6 

8.54 

12.20 

20 


will  probably  be  better  than  those  that  have  prevailed  in  southern 
Illinois  during  the  last  three  years. 

The  fact  that  soil  treatment  has  more  than  doubled  the  crop  val- 
ues at  Ewing  and  Raleigh  during  the  four-year  period  is  both  signifi- 
cant and  encouraging.  During  the  last  two  years  the  untreated  land 
has  averaged  4.5  bushels  of  wheat,  while  Plot  4 has  averaged  21.1  bush- 
els, and  Plot  9,  28.2  bushels.  The  live-stock  farmers,  as  well  as  those 
who  are  unable  to  feed  their  crops  on  the  farm,  should  profit  from  the 
fact  that  in  the  live-stock  system  limestone  produced  three  times  as 
much  increase  as  farm  manure,  and  that  the  residue  system  with  lime- 
stone, phosphate,  and  kainit  produced  as  large  yields  and  is  as  perma- 
nent as  the  live-stock  system  with  limestone,  phosphate,  and  manure. 

Phosphorus  Fertilizers 

Some  further  discussion  of  the  subject  of  phosphorus  fertilizers 
seems  appropriate  at  this  time.  In  time  of  drouth,  moisture  may  be 
the  limiting  factor  in  plant  growth,  and  under  such  conditions  no 
amount  of  any  kind  of  phosphorus  can  produce  much  effect.  Thus, 
where  steamed  bone  meal  has  been  applied  with  crop  residues  on  the 
Odin  experiment  field  on  the  common  prairie  soil  in  Marion  county, 
at  one  and  one-half  times  the  expense  for  rock  phosphate,  the  value 
of  the  increase,  as  an  average  of  the  last  four  years,  has  not  been  suf- 
ficient to  pay  its  cost ; in  fact,  the  bone  meal  has  paid  less  per  dollar 
invested  than  has  the  rock  phosphate  in  the  same  system  at  Ewing 
and  Raleigh. 

During  the  last  four  years  there  was  one  complete  failure  of  wheat 
(in  1912)  on  the  South  Farm  at  the  University  of  Illinois,  the  wheat 
being  winter-killed,  even  where  phosphate  was  applied ; but,  as  an 
average  of  four  tests  each  year  during  the  other  three  years,  rock 
phosphate  increased  the  yield  from  30.7  to  43.6  bushels  per  acre. 

Of  course  where  nitrogen  becomes  the  limiting  element,  additions 
of  phosphorus  may  produce  little  or  no  benefit.  It  should  be  noted, 
too,  that  ground  limestone,  especially  when  applied  liberally,  tends  to 
convert  some  of  the  natural  soil  phosphates  of  iron  and  aluminum 
into  the  more  easily  available  phosphate  of  calcium,  thus  reducing  the 
immediate  need  for  applying  phosphorus. 

In  an  address  before  the  State  Farmers’  Institute  at  Centralia 
three  years  ago,  I made  the  following  statements  concerning  limestone, 
organic  matter,  and  phosphorus : 

"For  southern  Illinois  this  is  the  order  in  which  they  should  be  used  in  the 
most  economical  methods: 

1 ‘ First,  apply  2 to  5 tons  per  acre  of  ground  limestone. 

"Second,  grow  clover  or  cowpeas. 

"Third,  apply  1000  to  2000  pounds  per  acre  of  very  finely  ground  natural 
rock  phosphate,  to  be  plowed  under  with  the  clover  or  cowpeas,  either  directly  or 
in  the  form  of  farm  manure. 


21 


f<In  central  and  northern  Illinois  the  same  materials  are  needed,  but  there 
the  limestone  may  take  third  place,  while  it  is  of  first  importance  in  this  part  of 
the  state.  ” 

Six  years  ago,  I made  the  following  statements  in  Circular  127  of 
the  Illinois  Experiment  Station : 

“As  to  the  value  of  non-acidulated  finely-ground  natural  rock  phosphate,  I 
consider  this  as  a material  which  gives  great  promise  of  extensive  use  in  the  econ- 
omic and  profitable  improvement  of  poor  soils  and  in  the  maintenance  of  large 
crop  yields  on  good  soils,  especially  in  the  states  thruout  the  great  Central 
West.  It  should  be  distinctly  understood,  however,  that  repeated  experiments  have 
shown  that  this  material  gives  practically  no  immediate  returns  if  used  in  the 
absence  of  decaying  organic  matter.  On  the  other  hand,  when  used  in  intimate 
connection  with  liberal  amounts  of  farm  manure  or  green  manures  or  both,  we 
have  conclusive  evidence  that  it  is  one  of  the  most  economical  and  profitable  forms 
of  phosphorus,  especially  where  the  crop  returns  for  a series  of  years  are  to  be 
taken  into  account.  ’ ’ 

‘ ‘ On  soil  very  deficient  in  decaying  organic  matter  I always  advise  the  use  of 
steamed  bone  meal  or  acid  phosphate  in  preference  to  raw  rock  phosphate.” 

I have  also  repeatedly  called  attention  to  the  fact  that,  in  the  ab- 
sence of  abundance  of  decaying  organic  matter,  kainit  may  be  used  in 
connection  with  rock  phosphate  to  increase  its  availability.  In  Soil 
Report  No.  1,  issued  in  1911,  it  is  pointed  out  that  when  kainit  was  so 
used  on  the  Fairfield  experiment  field  on  typical  prairie  soil  of  south- 
ern Illinois,  it  paid  for  itself.  At  the  present  time,  however,  its  cost 
is  prohibitive  on  account  of  the  European  war. 

I cannot  too  strongly  emphasize  the  statement  that  limestone  and 
organic  manures  are  of  primary  importance  for  southern  Illinois. 

“It  should  never  be  forgotten,  however,- that  phosphorus  must  also  (at  some 
time)  be  included  and  applied  with  the  vegetable  matter  if  a permanent  system 
of  soil  improvement  and  preservation  is  to  be  adopted.  While  liberal  use  of  lime- 
stone and  the  return  of  the  increased  vegetable  matter  will  make  marked  and 
profitable  improvement  in  southern  Illinois  soils,  yet  the  improvement  will  be  tem- 
porary unless  phosphorus  is  also  applied,  because  this  element  is  present  in  the 
soil  in  small  amount  and  it  is  removed  in  crops  and  sold  from  the  farm  not  only 
in  grain  and  hay,  but  also  in  bone,  in  meat,  and  in  milk.1 

This  statement  I also  made  at  Centralia  three  years  ago.  At  that 
time  I mentioned  that  the  cost  of  steamed  bone  meal  had  so  advanced 
as  to  discourage  its  use.  Altho  this  price  has  remained  high,  I am 
glad  now  to  say  that  the  cost  of  acid  phosphate  has  been  so  reduced  in 
recent  years  that  I should  advise  it  in  preference  to  steamed  bone  meal 
where  one  wishes  to  make  use  of  available  phosphorus. 

Thus,  if  one  desires  to  do  more  than  use  limestone  and  organic 
manures  at  the  beginning,  in  order  to  hasten  the  increase  of  crop 
yields,  he  may  use  either  acid  phosphate,  or  raw  phosphate  and 
kainit,  or  acid  phosphate  and  kainit ; and  with  the  decreasing  price  of 
acid  phosphate,  it  may  even  be  used  in  place  of  raw  phosphate  in  per- 


‘111.  Exp.  Sta.  Circ.  157. 


22 


manent  systems  of  soil  improvement.  Unquestionably  a pound  of 
phosphorus  is  worth  more  in  soluble  acid  phosphate  than  in  the  in- 
soluble rock  phosphate ; and  possibly  one  pound  of  soluble  phosphorus 
is  worth  as  much  as  two  of  the  insoluble ; but  certainly  the  informa- 
tion thus  far  secured  from  all  trustworthy  investigations  does  not 
justify  paying  four  or  five  times  as  much  for  phosphorus  in  soluble 
form  as  it  costs  in  fine-ground  raw  rock,  if  organic  manures  can  be 
provided  for  its  liberation  in  rational  farm  systems.  Because  of  the 
low  price  per  ton  of  rock  phosphate,  Illinois  farmers  almost  invariably 
purchase  it  in  carload  lots,  while  the  higher  price  for  acid  phosphate 
and  its  control  by  fertilizer  agents  have  usually  compelled  its  pur- 
chase in  smaller  quantities  by  those  who  desired  to  use  it.  The  prices 
which  have  actually  prevailed  in  past  years  in  southern  Illinois  have 
been  from  $6  to  $7  a ton  for  rock  phosphate  and  about  $18  for  acid 
phosphate.  It  should  be  remembered  that  one  ton  of  raw  phosphate 
and  one  ton  of  sulfuric  acid  make  two  tons  of  acid  phosphate,  so 
that,  at  these  prices,  a pound  of  phosphorus  would  cost  the  farmer 
five  or  six  times  as  much  in  acid  phosphate  as  in  the  fine-ground  na- 
tural rock. 

Ohio  Experiments  with  Manure  and  Phosphates 

In  a recent  statement  from  Director  Thorne  regarding  the  long- 
continued  investigations  of  the  Ohio  Experiment  Station  with  raw 
phosphate  and  acid  phosphate,  the  estimated  cost  of  raw  phosphate 
has  been  increased  to  $10  per  ton,  while  that  of  acid  phosphate  has 
been  reduced  to  $14  per  ton.  I have  reported  on  different  occasions 
the  progress  of  these  important  Ohio  investigations,  and  have  noted 
that  the  yields  were  practically  the  same  whether  raw  phosphate  or 
acid  phosphate  was  used;  altho  the  method  usually  followed  by  the 
Ohio  Station  of  computing  the  increase  in  yield  showed  greater  profit 
per  acre  from  acid  phosphate,  while,  per  dollar  invested,  greater  re- 
turns were  shown  from  the  use  of  raw  phosphate.  However,  with  raw 
phosphate  at  $10  and  acid  phosphate  at  $14  per  ton,  the  Ohio  compu- 
tations now  show  greater  profit  from  acid  phosphate  than  from  rock 
phosphate,  both  per  acre  and  per  dollar  invested. 

In  reference  to  these  experiments  the  following  statements  were 
made  in  Ohio  Experiment  Station  Circular  104,  published  in  1910: 

“On  Section  C,  Plots  1 and  11,  which,  it  will  be  observed,  are  continuous, 
have  regularly  given  yields  so  much  larger  than  those  of  the  other  unmanured 
plots  of  this  section  as  to  suggest  the  possibility  that  the  land  covered  by  these 
plots  may  have  been  at  one  time  occupied  by  a fence-row,  the  tract  lying  near  a 
barn,  and  for  this  reason  it  has  been  deemed  best  to  calculate  the  increase  on  the 
general  average  of  all  the  unfertilized  plots.  By  this  method  of  calculation  the 
average  increase  on  Plots  2 and  3 combined  (with  raw  phosphate)  is  found  to 
be  practically  the  same  as  on  Plots  5 and  6 combined  (with  acid  phosphate)  but 
when  the  larger  cost  of  the  acid  phosphate  is  deducted  the  net  gain  is  a little 
greater  on  Plots  2 and  3.” 


23 


In  previous  and  subsequent  years  the  Ohio  Station  has  followed 
a different  method  of  calculating  the  increase,  which,  together  with 
the  changes  in  cost  of  materials,  has,  in  the  opinion  of  Director 
Thorne,  placed  the  acid  phosphate  in  the  lead,  as  stated  above ; but  by 
his  courtesy  I am  permitted  to  give  the  average  actual  yields  secured 
in  these  experiments  during  the  entire  eighteen  years,  and  also  the 
averages  for  the  last  three  years,  including  1914  (see  Table  11).  By 
this  method  of  computation,  the  same  as  was  used  by  the  Ohio  Sta- 
tion in  1910,  the  average  profits  are  slightly  larger  from  the  raw 
phosphate,  both  for  the  eighteen  years  and  for  the  last  three  years, 
even  at  Illinois  prices  for  produce  and  Ohio  prices  for  the  phosphates 
used.  (For  a more  detailed  discussion  of  these  experiments  see  Illi- 
nois Experiment  Station  Circular  130.) 


Table  11. — Crop  Yields  per  Acre  in  Ohio  Manure-Phosphate 
Experiments 


Treatment 

Corn, 

bu. 

Wheat, 

bu. 

Hay, 

tons 

Value  of 
3 crops 

Net  gain  fo 
From 
3 acres 

r phosphate 
From  $1 

Average  of  18  Yeans:  1897  to  1914 

None  

Manure  

Manure,  rock  phosphate 
Manure,  acid  phosphate 

34.7 

56.4 

65.2 

64.0 

11.6 

21.2 

25.8 

26.7 

1.37 

1.91 

2.36 

2.34 

$29.85 

47.95 

57.40 

57.47 

$7.85 

7.28 

$4.91 

3.25 

Average  of  3 Years:  1912  to  1914 

None  

Manure  

Manure,  rock  phosphate 
Manure,  acid  phosphate 

42.9 
65.5 

78.9 
74.0 

13.5 

22.4 

26.3 

29.3 

1.63 

2.31 

2.65 

2.67 

$35.87 

54.77 

64.58 

65.10 

$8.21 

8.09 

$5.13 

3.61 

Note. — Rock  phosphate  applied  cost  $1.60  at  $10  per  ton;  acid  phosphate 
applied  cost  $2.24  at  $14  per  ton. 


Interpretation  of  Experiments 

In  conclusion,  I beg  to  ask  some  consideration  of  the  difficulties 
involved  in  the  interpretation  or  discussion  of  the  results  of  field  ex- 
periments in  soil  investigations.  From  the  standpoint  of  the  investi- 
gator, it  is  most  satisfactory  to  report  only  the  actual  data  secured, 
stating  the  kinds  and  amounts  of  materials  applied  and  the  crop  yields 
harvested ; and  then  to  leave  every  individual  to  figure  for  himself  as 
to  whether  he  can  make  use  of  the  record  of  facts  in  the  improvement 
of  his  own  farm  practice.  On  the  other  hand,  the  first  question  asked 
by  most  farmers  and  landowners  is,  “Does  it  pay?”  thus  almost  com- 
pelling the  investigator  to  report  some  estimate  of  the  cost  and  profit 
or  loss.  And  of  course  similar  estimates  are  commonly  made  in  most 


24 


other  lines  of  investment,  such  as  construction  work,  mining,  lumber- 
ing, manufactures,  and  mercantile  business. 

What  is  the  cost  of  a ton  of  limestone  spread  on  the  land  ? With  a 
price  of  60  cents  at  the  plant  and  25  cents  freight  for  50  miles,  the 
cash  expense  is  85  cents  a ton;  and  with  the  farm  near  the  station, 
and  the  hauling  and  spreading  done  when  men  and  teams  have  little 
else  to  do,  one  might  count  $1  per  ton  as  the  total  necessary  expense ; 
whereas,  with  a price  of  $1  at  the  plant,  75  cents  freight  for  150  miles, 
and  $4  a day  for  a man  and  team  to  haul  it  five  or  six  miles  to  the 
farm,  the  cost  may  easily  reach  $3  per  ton. 

What  is  the  value  of  a bushel  of  wheat,  a bushel  of  corn,  or  a ton 
of  hay?  The  ten-year  average  price  for  wheat  in  Illinois  is  90  cents, 
but  we  sold  for  75  last  summer  and  are  now  offered  $1.50.  The  Year 
Book  of  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture  reports  44 
cents  a bushel  as  the  average  farm-price  of  corn  in  Illinois,  on  Decem- 
ber 1,  for  the  ten  years  1903  to  1912 ; and  35  cents  is  probably  not  far 
from  the  average  value  of  corn  on  the  stalk.  The  ten-year  average 
farm-price  for  No.  1 timothy  hay  is  $10.84 ; but,  for  average  farm  hay 
lying  in  the  swath,  $7  is  not  below  a reasonably  safe  value. 

We  are  commonly  assured  that  future  prices  will  average  higher 
for  all  farm  products.  They  will  have  to,  if  the  farmers  of  the  United 
States  are  to  have  adequate  funds  for  investment  in  soil  improvement ; 
but  past  facts  covering  a ten-year  period  are  a safer  guide  than  fu- 
ture predictions,  and  there  is  grave  danger  that  the  United  States  of 
America  may  continue  the  policy  recently  condemned  by  the  great 
railroad  builder,  James  J.  Hill,  in  the  following  words: 

“The  farm  is  the  basis  of  all  industry,  but  for  many  years  this  country  has 
made  the  mistake  of  unduly  assisting  manufacture,  commerce,  and  other  activities 
that  center  in  cities,  at  the  expense  of  the  farm.  ” 

Which  is  better — to  tax  the  man  who  farms  the  land,  or  the  man 
who  owns  the  mortgage? 

Which  is  better — to  increase  freights,  or  to  reduce  railroad  ex- 
penses until  agriculture  can  compete  with  commerce? 

Which  is  better — to  fix  a minimum  wage  in  the  city  to  attract  more 
people  from  the  farms,  or  to  fix  a minimum  price  for  country  wheat 
to  feed  our  increasing  population  ? 

Which  is  better — to  build  a Panama  Canal  for  the  world  and  oper- 
ate it  at  a loss,  or  to  rebuild  the  millions  of  acres  of  abandoned  farms 
in  our  older  states  ? 

Which  is  better--to  erect  more  coast  defenses  and  construct  more 
warships  with  which  to  frighten  or  to  fight  other  nations,  or  to — 

“Stop  building  national  warships  and  coast  defenses  and  unite  the  national 
navies  of  the  world  into  an  international  or  world  navy  to  be  controlled  by  a rep- 
resentative international  commission  or  congress,  and  thus  maintain  world  peace 
with  world  power;  for  not  until  the  dawn  of  the  millennium  can  we  hope  for  per- 


25 


manent  peace  from  sentiment  and  treaty.  The  union  of  all  navies  at  the  close  of 
the  present  war  into  one  international  naval  power  for  the  preservation  of  per- 
manent international  peace  should  be  less  difficult  of  achievement  than  was  the 
union  of  the  states  into  the  United  States  at  a time  when  battles  were  sometimes 
fought  a month  after  peace  was  declared.  Surely  nations  may  trust  for  justice  to 
the  wisdom  and  fairness  of  such  a representative  international  congress,  just  as 
our  states  must  trust  our  national  Congress;  and  such  a project  should  hasten  the 
termination  of  the  international  war.  ’ n 

When  we  take  down  our  coast  defenses  and  cease  building  war- 
ships for  destruction,  we  may  thereby  save  a quarter-billion  dollars  a 
year,  to  be  devoted  so  far  as  needed  to  agricultural  investigation,  in- 
struction, extension,  and  demonstration;  to  the  encouragement  and 
control  of  the  production  and  transportation  of  limestone  and  phos- 
phate, in  order  to  insure  the  possible  use  of  these  basic  materials  where 
needed ; and,  if  possible,  to  a sufficient  control  of  markets  and  market- 
ing to  encourage  production  with  reasonable  profit,  to  discourage  spec- 
ulation in  human  foods,  and  to  prevent  unreasonable  expense  and  ex- 
cessive profits  by  those  who  stand  between  producer  and  consumer. 

If  Illinois  were  to  receive  her  “share”  of  this  quarter-billion  dol- 
lars, it  could  adequately  endow  a school  within  easy  reach  of  every 
home  in  this  great  state,  for  the  purpose  of  teaching  the  oncoming 
generations  not  only  how  not  to  treat  Illinois  soils,  but  how  most  econ- 
omically to  make  them  permanently  richer  and  more  productive  for 
the  prosperity  of  all  the  people  and  to  the  honor  of  the  commonwealth. 

H’rom  an  address  by  the  author  before  the  Annual  Convention  of  the  Amer- 
ican Bankers  Association,  at  Eiehmond,  Virginia,  October  15,  1914,  previously 
suggested  in  a letter,  dated  August  5,  1914,  addressed  to  the  Hon.  William  J. 
Bryan,  Department  of  State,  Washington,  D.  C. 


26 


ADDED  NOTE 

On  page  664  of  the  Breeder’s  Gazette  of  April  1,  Mr.  Henry  G. 
Bell  (Agronomist  of  the  Middle  West  Soil  Improvement  Committee 
of  the  National  Fertilizer  Association)  quotes  a statement  from  my 
article  in  the  Gazette  of  February  25,  relating  to  fertilizer  experi- 
ments “ conducted  by  the  Ohio  Experiment  Station  at  both  Wooster 
and  Strongsville,  ’ ’ and  he  then  makes  the  following  comments : 

"This  quotation  purports  to  give  in  essence  the  findings  of  the  Ohio  Station 

relative  to  the  profit  of  using  nitrogen,  potassium  and  phosphorus True,  on 

the  basis  of  the  low  figures  for  crops  quoted  neither  the  use  of  nitrogen  alone, 
nor  of  potassium  alone,  paid,  while  phosphorus  gave  an  excellent  return.  From 
this  fact  your  correspondent  concludes  that  the  use  of  either  nitrogen  or  potas- 
sium in  combination  with  phosphorus,  or  all  of  the  three  elements  in  combination, 
does  not  pay,  which  conclusion  is  absolutely  at  variance  with  Director  Thorne’s 
own  statement  as  to  the  profit  of  the  different  methods  of  treatment,  which  quota- 
tion follows: 

1 1 1 Every  complete  fertilizer  has  been  used  with  a profit,  since  the  first  period, 
but  when  either  nitrate  of  soda  or  muriate  of  potash  has  been  used  unaccom- 
panied by  some  carrier  of  phosphorus  there  has  been  a net  loss  in  each  period 
(except  from  the  muriate  of  potash  in  the  third  period)  and  in  the  average  of  the 
20  years.* 

"Director  Thorne’s  own  figures  on  the  plots  to  which  a complete  fertilizer 
was  applied  show  that  an  average  investment  of  $19.29  ($19.78)  per  acre  for  fer- 
tilizer gave  a net  profit  of  $12.97 Your  correspondent  was  correct  so  far  as 

he  quoted,  but,  as  we  have  pointed  out,  a further  examination  of  the  table  of  tests 
quoted  shows  that  the  use  of  nitrogen,  phosphoric  acid  and  potash  in  combination 
paid  handsomely  at  the  Ohio  Experiment  .Station.  ’ * 

For  the  benefit  of  tbe  reader  who  cares  to  do  his  own  thinking,  I 
am  presenting  in  the  accompanying  tabular  statement  the  results  from 
all  the  plots  receiving  corresponding  commercial  fertilizers  in  the  five- 
field  rotations,  representing  averages  of  twenty  years  at  Wooster  and 
nineteen  years  at  Strongsville. 

It  will  be  seen  that  $2.60  invested  in  phosphorus  paid  a profit  of 
$14.40,  while  $19.78  invested  in  complete  fertilizers  paid  a profit  of 
$7.43,  as  an  average  of  the  results  from  the  twelve  plots.  Mr.  Bell 
states  that  “the  plots  to  which  a complete  fertilizer  was  applied  show 
that  an  average  investment  of  $19.29  for  fertilizer  gave  a net  profir 
of  $12.97.”  During  the  last  three  or  four  years,  Director  Thorne  has 
changed  the  fertilizer  applied  to  Plot  27  so  as  to  reduce  the  expense 
from  $23.50  to  $17.60,  and  with  this  change  the  present  average  cost 
of  complete  fertilizers  for  the  twelve  plots  is  $19.29,  as  Mr.  Bell  re- 
ports ; but  in  computing  the  average  profit  for  the  entire  period,  Di- 
rector Thorne  still  continues  to  deduct  $23.50  instead  of  $17.60  as  the 
annual  cost  for  this  plot. 

The  “net  profit  of  $12.97,”  mentioned  by  Mr.  Bell,  is  not  the  gen- 
eral average  from  both  Wooster  and  Strongsville,  but  only  the  aver- 
age from  the  twelve  plots  at  Wooster  where  complete  fertilizers  were 
used.  Of  course  the  average  of  both  series  of  experiments,  showing 


27 


$7.43  profit  from  an  investment  of  $19.78,  is  far  more  trustworthy  as 
a basis  for  advising  farmers  what  they  may  expect  from  the  use  of 
such  complete  fertilizers ; but  even  if  we  ignore  the  Strongsville  data 
and  consider  only  the  $12.97  mentioned  by  Mr.  Bell,  we  may  well  in- 
quire why  a farmer  should  invest  $19.78  in  complete  fertilizer  in  the 
hope  of  getting  a profit  of  $12.97  when  the  same  “ table  of  tests’ ’ 
(page  79  of  Ohio  Experiment  Station  Circular  144)  shows  that  $2.60 
invested  in  phosphorus  alone  gave  a profit  of  $13.92.  Why  should  the 
farmer  reduce  his  profit  by  95  cents  by  spending  $17.18  for  nitrogen 
and  potassium  ? 


Fertilizer  Experiments  by  Ohio  Experiment  Station 
With  Five-Field  Rotation,  Corn,  Oats,  Wheat,  Clover,  and  Timothy 


Plot 

No. 

Fertilizing  elements 
per  year  for  5 years 

Average 
from  5 

value  of  increase 
acres  (5  crops) 

Annual 
cost  of 
ferti- 
lizers for 
5 acres 

Average 

profit 

Nitro- 

gen, 

lbs. 

Phos-  1 
phorus, 
lbs. 

Potas- 

sium, 

lbs. 

20-year 
aver,  at 
Wooster 

19 -year 
aver,  at 
Strongs- 
ville 

|General 

average 

From 
5 acres 

From 

$1 

2 

20 

$16.52 

$17.48 

$17.00 

$ 2.60 

$14.40 

$5.54 

3 

108 

5.73 

-.17 

2.78 

6.50 

Loss 

Loss 

5 

76 

8.37 

1.77 

5.07 

14.40 

Loss 

Loss 

’ 6 

76 

20 

3L34 

21.48  ~ 

26.41 

17.00 

9.41 

[55 

8 

20 

108 

24.69 

18.87 

21.78 

9.10 

12.68 

1.39 

9 

76 

108 

11.07 

4.76 

7.92 

20.90 

Loss 

Loss 

Ml 7 

76~ 

20 

108 

39.28 

23.71 

31.50 

23.50 

8T00 

^34 

26 

76 

20 

108 

32.37 

22.85 

27.61 

23.50 

4.11 

.17 

27 

76 

20 

108 

33.42 

19.71 

26.57 

23.50 

3.07 

.13 

29 

76 

20 

108 

33.42 

23.12 

28.27 

23.50 

4.77 

.20 

17 

38 

30 

108 

35.23 

23.21 

29.22 

17.60 

11.62 

.66 

21 

38 

30 

108 

33.50 

21.20 

27.35 

17.60 

9.75 

.55 

23 

38 

30 

108 

31.75 

21.80 

26.78 

17.60 

9.18 

.52 

24 

38 

30 

108 

31.91 

22.21 

27.06 

17.60 

9.46 

.54 

30 

38 

30 

108 

30.40 

27.99 

29.20 

17.60 

11.60 

.66 

12 

112 

20 

108 

39.98 

24.72 

32.35 

30.70 

1.65 

.05 

14 

50 

15 

74 

30.14 

18.44 

24.29 

16.05 

8.24 

.51 

15 

25 

10  | 

I 41 

21.66 

11.10 

16.38 

8.60 

7.78 

.90 

Average  of  last  twelve  plots 

$32.75 

“$2L67_ 

$27.21 

$ 7.43 

$ .38 

Note. — The  increase  produced  by  fertilizers,  as  it  stands  in  the  field  ready 
for  the  harvest,  is  valued  at  40  cents  a bushel  for  corn,  30  cents  for  oats,  80  cents 
for  wheat,  $8  a ton  for  hay,  $3  for  corn  stalks,  and  $2  for  straw. 


A still  more  trustworthy  basis  of  comparison  is  between  Plot  2 
and  the  average  of  Plots  il,  26,  27,  and  29,  which  shows  that  $2.60 
invested  in  phosphorus  gave  $16.52  increase  in  the  crop  values,  while 
$20.90  invested  in  nitrogen  and  potassium  (applied  in  addition  to  the 
phosphorus)  produced  an  additional  gross  increase  valued  at  only 


28 


$18.10,  thus  showing  $2.80  net  loss  from  the  investment  in  nitrogen 
and  potassium,  even  when  used  in  combination  with  phosphorus. 

The  statement  that  the  use  of  “all  of  the  three  elements  in  com- 
bination does  not  pay”  is  incorrectly  credited  to  me  by  Mr.  Bell.  I 
am  in  full  accord  with  the  statement  which  he  quotes  from  Director 
Thorne ; and  in  my  article  of  February  25  I made  the  following  state- 
ment concerning  the  use  of  complete  fertilizers  for  the  common  grain 
and  forage  crops  on  normal  soils : 

“Such  fertilizers  are  not  likely  to  yield  even  a temporary  profit,  excepting 
on  soils  where  phosphorus  is  the  limiting  element,  and  in  this  case  the  phosphorus 
may  yield  a sufficient  profit  to  pay  for  the  loss  from  the  use  of  commercial  nitro- 
gen and  potassium.  ” 

Thus,  in  these  Ohio  Experiments,  as  a general  average  of  results 
from  Wooster  and  Strongsville,  the  profit  of  $14.40  from  phosphorus 
alone  was  not  entirely  wiped  out  in  paying  for  the  loss  on  nitrogen 
and  potassium,  but  it  was  reduced  to  $7.43 ; and  the  profit  per  dollar 
invested  was  reduced  from  $5.54  with  phosphorus  alone  to  only  38 
cents  as  an  average  of  the  twelve  plots  on  which  complete  fertilizers 
were  used. 

Mr.  Bell’s  statement  that  “the  use  of  nitrogen,  phosphoric  acid 
and  potash  in  combination  paid  handsomely  at  the  Ohio  Experiment 
Station”  may  be  true  from  his  viewpoint ; but  from  the  viewpoint  of  a 
farmer  with  limited  capital  the  matter  presents  a different  aspect,  the 
more  especially,  when,  by  reference  to  “the  first  period”  (mentioned 
by  Director  Thorne  in  the  above  quotation  from  Mr.  Bell’s  article), 
we  find  by  “ a further  examination  of  the  table  of  tests,  ’ ’ that  during 
the  first  five  years  of  the  Ohio  experiments,  these  complete  fertilizers 
paid  as  an  average  a profit  of  only  3 percent  at  Wooster  and  1 percent 
at  Strongsville. 

The  man  who  desires  to  use  both  head  and  hands  in  the  business 
of  farming  may  well  preserve  and  study  the  information  afforded  by 
the  table  of  results  presented  herewith.  The  footnote  gives  the  values 
assigned  to  the  farm  produce.  Are  they  high  enough  for  the  increase 
of  crops  standing  in  the  field  ? At  the  prices  used  by  Director  Thorne 
for  the  three  elements  (see  Plots  2,  3,  and  5),  a 2-8-2  fertilizer  would 
cost  only  $17.45  per  ton.  Can  the  reader  purchase  locally  for  less 
money  ? 

As  a general  average  of  the  twelve  plots,  the  complete  fertilizers 
supplied  less  nitrogen,  less  phosphorus,  and  less  potassium  than  was 
removed  in  the  crops  harvested.  The  average  acre-yields  at  Wooster 
where  $19.78  worth  of  fertilizer  was  used  were  45  bushels  of  corn,  45 
of  oats,  24  of  wheat,  iy2  tons  of  clover,  and  1%  tons  of  timothy. 

From  a study  of  the  table,  the  effect  of  each  element  may  be  found 
under  four  different  conditions.  Thus  $2.60  in  phosphorus  alone  paid 
back  $17,  but  where  used  in  addition  to  potassium,  the  $2.60  invested 


29 


in  phosphorus  paid  back  $19  (compare  Plots  2 and  8).  Where  used 
in  addition  to  nitrogen,  the  $2.60  in  phosphorus  returned  $21.34:  (see 
Plots  5 and  6)  ; and  where  applied  with  both  nitrogen  and  potassium, 
the  $2.60  spent  for  phosphorus  paid  back  $20.57  (compare  Plot  9 with 
the  average  of  Plots  11,  26,  27,  and  29). 

Soluble  phosphorus  on  Plots  11  and  27  produced  about  the  same 
average  results  as  bone  meal  on  Plot  26  and  slag  phosphate  on  Plot 
29.  Likewise  the  nitrogen  produced  about  the  same  effect  whether 
applied  in  sodium  nitrate  (17),  in  oil  meal  (21),  in  dried  blood  (23), 
in  ammonium  sulfate  (24),  or  in  tankage  (30). 

With  a decrease  of  nitrogen  (from  76  to  38  pounds)  and  an  in- 
crease of  phosphorus  (from  20  to  30  pounds),  the  profit  was  increased, 
but  with  an  increase  of  nitrogen  (Plot  12)  the  profit  was  decreased. 
Nitrogen  and  potassium  produced  some  increase  in  yield,  and  this  the 
farmer  should  secure,  not  by  buying  those  elements  at  a loss,  but  by 
securing  more  nitrogen  from  the  inexhaustible  supply  in  the  air  thru 
a larger  use  of  legumes  (with  limestone  if  needed),  and  by  liberating 
potassium  from  the  inexhaustible  supply  in  the  corn-belt  soils  by 
means  of  decaying  organic  manures. 

The  information  reported  in  this  tabular  statement  is  based  upon 
the  actual  weights  from  about  five  thousand  harvested  crops  from 
measured  areas  of  land,  and  the  established  facts  thus  recorded  should 
help  to  put  the  agriculture  of  the  Middle  West  on  a permanent  and 
more  profitable  basis. 


MATERIALS  FOR  SOIL  IMPROVEMENT 
Natural  Rock  Phosphate: 

Fine-ground  raw  rock  phosphate,  containing  from  io  to  14  percent  of 
phosphorus,  can  be  obtained  -from  the  following  companies,  delivered  in 
bulk  on  board  cars  at  the  mines  in  Tennessee  for  $2.50  to  $5  per  ton, 
the  price  varying  with  the  quality.  The  freight  rate  from  Tennessee  per 
ton  of  2000  pounds  in  carload  lots  varies  from  $2.50  to  points  in  southern 
Illinois,  to  $3.58  to  northern  Illinois  points.  Of  course,  these  addresses 
are  given  solely  as  a matter  of  information,  and  the  Experiment  Station 
makes  no  recommendations  or  guarantees  as  to  reliability. 

Mt.  Pleasant  Fertilizer  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Robin  Jones  Phosphate  Co.,  Nashville,  Tenn. 

Natural  Phosphate  Co.,  Nashville,  Tenn. 

Farmers  Ground  Rock  Phosphate  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Ruhm  Phosphate  Mining  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Blue  Grass  Phosphate  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Southern  Lime  & Phosphate  Co.,  Birmingham,  Ala. 

Federal  Chemical  Co.,  Columbia,  Tenn. 


30 


Central  Phosphate  Co.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Tenn. 

Central  Kentucky  Phosphate  Co.,  Wallace,  Ky. 

American  Fertilizer  Co.,  Santa  Fe,  Tenn. 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  rock  phosphate  varies  much  in  quality. 
Consequently,  it  should  always  be  purchased  upon  a guaranteed  analysis, 
and  it  is  advisable  for  the  purchaser  to  take  an  average  sample  of  the  car- 
load when  received  and  have  it  analyzed  both  for  phosphorus  and  for  fine- 
ness, even  tho  the  analysis  cost  him  $2  or  $3.  To  collect  an  average  sample, 
take  a small  teaspoonful  from  about  fifty  different  places  in  the  car,  not 
only  from  the  surface  but  also  from  different  depths.  These  fifty  spoonfuls 
well  mixed  together  will  make  a trustworthy  sample,  and  about  one  pound 
of  this  should  be  sent  to  some  commercial  chemist  for  analysis. 

If  1234-percent  rock,  containing  250  pounds  of  phosphorus  per  ton,  costs 
$7.50  (including  freight),  then  10-percent  rock,  containing  200  pounds  of 
the  element  per  ton,  is  worth  $6,  a difference  in  value  of  $1.50  per  ton, 
which,  on  a 30-ton  car,  amounts  to  $45. 

The  important  phosphorus  compound  in  rock  phosphate  is  calcium  phos- 
phate, Ca3  (P04)2.  The  percentage  of  this  compound  in  the  rock  phos- 
phate marks  the  purity  of  the  rock.  Thus,  if  the  rock  phosphate  contains 
60  percent  of  calcium  phosphate,  it  is  60  percent  pure,  with  40  percent  of 
impurities. 

Sometimes  the  guarantee  is  given  as  “phosphoric  acid,”  meaning  phos- 
phoric oxid,  P2Os.  This  also  is  a definite  compound  and  always  contains 
43%  percent  of  the  element  phosphorus.  Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
same  sample  of  rock  phosphate  may  be  guaranteed  to  contain  62  percent  of 
calcium  phosphate,  Ca3  (P04) 2,  or 28.4 percent  of  “phosphoric  acid”  (P2^5)> 
or  12.4  percent  of  phosphorus  (P). 

Raw  rock  phosphate  should  be  very  finely  ground,  so  that  at  least  90 
percent  of  the  material  can  be  washed  thru  a sieve  with  100  meshes  to  the 
linear  inch,  or  with  10,000  meshes  to  the  square  inch.  Of  course  anyone 
can  test  for  fineness  by  sifting  ten  ounces  and  then  drying  and  weighing 
what  will  not  wash  thru  the  sieve. 

As  a rule,  it  is  more  satisfactory  to  purchase  in  bulk  rather  than  in 
bags  (see  page  15  of  Circular  no). 

Bone  Meal 

A good  grade  of  steamed  bone  meal  (about  1234  percent  phosphorus) 
can  be  obtained  delivered  in  Illinois  for  $25  to  $30  a ton,  from  the  local 
agents  of  Morris  & Co.,  Swift  & Co.,  Armour  & Co.,  the  American  Glue 
Co.,  or  the  American  Fertilizer  Co.,  Chicago,  111.,  or  from  the  Empire  Car- 
bon Works,  National  Stock  Yards,  East  St.  Eouis,  111. 

Potassium  Salts 

Potassium  chlorid  (so-called  “muriate  of  potash”),  containing  about  42 
percent  of  potassium,  can  be  obtained  for  about  $45  a ton  from  Armour  & 
Co.,  Swift  & Co.,  or  Darling  & Co.,  Union  Stock  Yards,  Chicago,  111.,  from 
the  German  Kali  Works  or  the  Nitrate  Agencies  Co.,  Chicago,  111.,  from 
A.  Smith  & Bro.,  lampico,  111.,  or  from  the  American  Agricultural  Chemi- 


31 


cal  Co.,  New  York,  N.  Y. ; and  kainit,  containing  about  io  percent  of 
potassium,  together  with  some  magnesium  sulfate,  magnesium  chlorid,  and 
sodium  chlorid,  can  also  be  obtained  from  Armour  & Co.,  Darling  & Co., 
Swift  & Co.,  Hirsch,  Stein  & Co.,  the  Chicago  Fertilizer  Works,  or  the 
German  Kali  Works,  Chicago,  111.,  for  about  $13  a ton. 

Ground  Limestone 

Ground  limestone  can  now  be  obtained  at  60  cents  a ton  ($1  in  bags, 
to  be  returned  at  purchaser’s  expense  and  risk)  from  the  Southern  Illinois 
Penitentiary,  Menard,  111.,  and  at  different  prices  from  the  following  com- 
panies : 

Casper  Stolle  Quarry  & Contracting  Co.,  East  St.  Louis,  111.  (Quarry 
at  Stolle,  111.) 

Southwestern  Contracting  & Engineering  Co.,  East  St.  Louis,  111. 

Ellis  Bros.,  Elsberry,  Mo. 

Carthage  Superior  Limestone  Co.,  Carthage,  Mo. 

Mitchell  Lime  Co.,  Mitchell,  Ind. 

John  Armstrong  Lime  & Quarry  Co.,  Alton,  111. 

Lehigh  Stone  Co.,  Kankakee,  111. 

Elmhurst-Chicago  Stone  Co.,  Elmhurst,  111. 

East  St.  Louis  Stone  Co.,  East  St.  Louis,  111. 

Columbia  Quarry  Co.,  St.  Louis,  Mo.  (Quarry  at  Columbia,  111.) 

McLaughlin-Mateer  Co.,  Kankakee,  111. 

Lockyer  Quarry  Co.,  Alton,  111. 

Western  Whiting  & Mfg.  Co.,  Elsah,  111. 

Eldred  Stone  Co.,  Eldred,  111. 

Marblehead  Lime  Co.,  Masonic  Temple,  Chicago,  111.  (Quarries  at 
Quincy,  111.) 

United  States  Crushed  Stone  Co.,  108  S.  LaSalle  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Dolese  & Shepard  Co.,  108  S.  LaSalle  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Fruitgrowers’  Refrigerating  & Power  Co.,  Anna,  111. 

Biggsville  Crushed  Stone  Co.,  Biggsville,  111. 

Hart  & Page,  Rockford,  111. 

McManus  & Tucker,  Keokuk,  Iowa. 

Moline  Stone  Co.,  Moline,  111. 

John  Markman,  Gladstone,  111. 

Superior  Stone  Co.,  218  Hearst  Bldg.,  Chicago,  111. 

Brownell  Improvement  Co.,  1220  Chamber  of  Commerce,  Chicago,  111. 

Dolese  Bros.  Co.,  10  S.  LaSalle  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Ohio  & Indiana  Stone  Co.,  Indianapolis,  Ind.  (Quarry  at  Greencastle, 
Ind.) 

C.  F.  Gill  & Co.,  6709  Lakewood  Av.,  Chicago.  111.  (Quarry  at  Joliet, 

111.) 

Riverside  Lime  & Stone  Co.,  131  W.  63d  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Carrico  Stone  Co.,  Rockford,  111. 

Logansport  Stone  & Construction  Co.,  Huntington,  Ind. 

Some  of  these  companies  furnish  fine-ground  limestone  and  some  fur- 
nish limestone  screenings,  which  include  both  very  fine  dust  and  some 


32 


coarse  particles  even  as  large  as  corn  kernels.  In  carload  lots  the  price  on 
board  cars  at  the  plant  varies  from  50  cents  to  $1  a ton  according  to  fine- 
ness. The  freight  charges  are  one-half  cent  per  ton  per  mile,  with  a mini- 
mum charge  of  25  cents  per  ton  by  each  railroad  handling  the  car,  and 
with  a minimum  carload  of  30  tons.  At  most  points  in  Illinois  the  cost  de- 
livered in  bulk  in  box  cars  should  be  between  $1  and  $2  a ton.  Sometimes 
one  can  get  one  and  one-half  tons  of  material  containing  one  ton  of  fine 
dust  and  half  a ton  of  coarser  particles,  varying  in  size  from  less  than  pin- 
heads to  corn  kernels,  at  no  greater  expense  than  would  be  required  for 
one  ton  of  fine-ground  stone  containing  no  coarser  particles.  The  coarser 
particles  will  last  in  the  soil  longer  than  the  finer  material,  which  is  rapidly 
lost  by  leaching;  and  a product  that  will  all  pass  thru  a sieve  with  8 or 
10  meshes  to  the  linear  inch,  and  that  contains  all  the  fine  dust  produced  in 
the  process  of  crushing  or  grinding  is  very  satisfactory. 

Machines  for  Grinding  Limestone 

Portable  machines  for  crushing  and  grinding  limestone,  using  thresh- 
ing engines  for  power,  can  be  obtained  from — 

Williams  Patent  Crusher  & Pulverizer  Co.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Universal  Crusher  Co.,  Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa. 

Pennsylvania  Crusher  Co.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

Wheeling  Mold  & Foundry  Co.,  Wheeling,  W.  Va. 

Jeffrey  Manufacturing  Co.,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

Allis-Chalmers  Mfg.  Co.,  Milwaukee,  Wis. 

Gardner  Crusher  Co.,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 

Power  & Mining  Machinery  Co.,  Cudahy,  Wis. 

Machine  for  Spreading  Limestone  and  Phosphate 

Directions  for  making  a machine  for  spreading  ground  limestone  and 
ground  rock  phosphate  are  given  in  Circular  no,  which  will  be  sent  to 
anyone  upon  request.  This  is  a homemade  machine,  carried  on  the  wheels 
of  an  old  mower,  and  it  can  be  made  by  any  good  blacksmith  and  car- 
penter. 

There  is  no  regular  manufactured  machine  on  the  market  that  has  given 
as  satisfactory  service  in  our  experience  as  these  homemade  machines. 
They  are  made  upon  order  by  many  blacksmiths  in  different  parts  of  the 
state,  and  are  usually  kept  in  stock  by  the  following  makers: 

George  Kubacki,  DuBois,  111. 

Pana  Enterprise  Manufacturing  Co.,  Pana,  111. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


CIRCULAR  No.  182 


THE  FERTILIZER  PROBLEM  FROM  THE 
VEGETABLE  GROWER’S  STANDPOINT 


By  C.  E.  Durst 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  MAY.  1915 


Contents  op  Circular  182 


PAGE 

Introduction  3 

The  General  Principle^  of  Plant  Nutrition 4 

Losses  of  Fertility  in  Vegetable  Growing 5 

Losses  in  Crop  Removals 5 

Losses  by  Drainage  and  Leaching 6 

Losses  of  Organic  Matter  and  Nitrogen  by  Oxidation 7 

How  to  Check  the  Losses  of  Fertility 8 

Probable  Losses  of  Fertility  Annually 9 

Supplying  Fertility  to  the  Soil 9 

Nitrogen  and  Organic  Matter 10 

Manure,  Its  Care  and  Use.  . . 10 

The  Use  of  Crop  Refuse  and  Cover  Crops 14 

The  Use  of  Commercial  Forms  of  Nitrogen 20 

Phosphorus  , 23 

Potassium  25 

Limestone  26 

Drainage  and  Crop  Rotation 27 

Summary  27 


THE  FERTILIZER  PROBLEM  FROM  THE 
VEGETABLE  GROWER’S  STANDPOINT1 


By  C.  E.  Durst,  Associate  in  Olericulture 

INTRODUCTION 

The  general  principles  of  soil  fertility  apply  with  equal  signifi- 
cance in  both  vegetable  and  farm-crop  production,  but  there  are 
marked  differences  respecting  the  specific  manner  of  their  application. 
In  general  farming,  the  quantity  and  proper  maturity  of  the  crops 
are  the  only  objects  involved;  in  vegetable  growing,  these  are  im- 
portant, but  added  to  them  are  such  factors  as  earliness,  quality,  and 
appearance  of  the  products.  In  fact,  the  latter  are  the  sole  factors  in 
determining  the  profits  from  certain  crops.  A few  days’  gain  in 
early  cabbage  or  spinach,  for  instance,  may  mean  an  increase  of  50 
or  100  percent  in  the  profit.  Relatively  small  differences  in  the  quality 
or  flavor  of  such  crops  as  melons,  lettuce,  and  celery,  often  cause  wide 
differences  in  the  returns.  The  size  and  appearance,  or  “finish,”  of 
nearly  all  vegetables  play  a large  part  in  the  prices  received. 

In  other  words,  looking  at  the  question  from  a practical  point  of 
view,  soil  fertility  is  one  thing  from  a general  farmer’s  standpoint,  and 
quite  another  thing  from  the  vegetable  grower’s  standpoint.  In  the 
first  place,  vegetables  as  a class  require  much  richer  soil  than  farm 
crops.  Land  capable  of  producing  admirable  farm  crops  will  ordi- 
narily produce  only  mediocre  vegetables.  We  have  in  Illinois  plenty 
of  land  that  will  produce  50  to  75  bushels  of  corn  or  30  to  40  bushels 
of  wheat  in  a favorable  season.  But  plant  this  land  to  cabbage  or 
onions  and  what  would  be  the  result?  As  every  practical  gardener 
knows,  only  fair  crops  of  these  vegetables  would  be  produced.  The 
best  general  farming  land  needs  much  building  up  before  it  will  grow 
vegetables  successfully,  and  three  or  four  years  of  persistent  effort 
are  generally  required  to  accomplish  the  result. 

Where  vegetables  are  grown  on  a very  intensive  basis,  as  on  the 
high-priced  land  near  the  larger  cities,  tilled  crops  are  grown  prac- 
tically all  the  time  during  the  growing  season.  There  is  no  “sowing 
down”  as  in  general  farming.  The  almost  continuous  stirring  of  the 
soil  and  the  fact  that  vegetables,  as  a rule,  shade  it  very  little,  per- 
mit a large  loss  of  nitrogen  and  organic  matter  by  oxidation.  In  fact, 
intensive  vegetable  gardening  occasions  a condition  which  approaches 
bare  fallow;  and  it  has  been  conclusively  proved  that  bare  fallow, 
while  usually  bringing  about  increased  yields  in  the  crops  immedi- 
ately following,  results  eventually  in  decidedly  decreased  yields,  be- 

1A  revision  of  a paper  read  at  the  Forty-first  Annual  Convention  of  the 
Horticultural  Society  of  Central  Illinois,  at  Peoria,  Illinois,  November,  1913. 


4 


cause  of  its  destructive  effect  on  the  nitrogen  and  organic  matter  of 
the  soil. 

The  market  gardener  usually  operates  on  land  of  high  fertility. 
Within  recent  years,  it  has  become  well  understood  that  the  organisms 
living  in  the  soil  play  a far  greater  role  in  its  fertility  than  has  been 
heretofore  supposed.  It  is  also  known  that  the  prodigality  of  this 
life  increases  with  the  amount  of  actively  decaying  organic  matter, 
other  things  being  equal.  That  this  factor  alone  adds  many  compli- 
cations to  the  problem  cannot  be  disputed. 

Experienced  gardeners  realize  the  importance  of  rich  soil,  and  do 
not  hesitate  to  fertilize  heavily.  Applications  of  20  to  40  tons  of 
manure  to  the  acre  annually  are  not  at  all  uncommon.  Besides  this, 
large  expenditures  are  often  made  for  commercial  fertilizers.  The 
statistics  of  Massachusetts  show,  for  instance,  that  during  a period 
of  ten  years  the  market  gardeners  spent,  on  an  average,  $76  per  acre 
annually  for  manures.  Many  individual  gardeners  thruout  the  coun- 
try spend  several  times  this  amount.  Such  large  outlays  in  fertilizers 
are  not  feasible  in  general  farming,  where  the  product  is  commonly 
not  worth  more  than  $25  to  $50  to  the  acre ; but  they  are  feasible  and 
profitable  in  intensive  market  gardening,  where  the  product  is  some- 
times worth  $500  to  $1000  per  acre.  The  gardener  can  profitably  use 
amounts  and  forms  of  fertilizers  and  methods  of  applying  them  that 
the  general  farmer  could  not  possibly  afford.  The  fact  is  that  in  long- 
continued  successful  market  gardening,  the  original  fertility  content 
of  the  soil  is  often  a matter  of  minor  importance  in  comparison  with 
the  fertility  applied. 

The  various  factors  mentioned,  and  others  which  might  be  enu- 
merated, make  the  fertility  problem  in  vegetable  growing  a distinct 
one  in  itself. 

THE  GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  PLANT  NUTRITION 

Ten  elements,  or  fundamental  substances,  are  necessary  for  the 
growth  of  plants.  These  are  carbon,  oxygen,  hydrogen,  calcium,  mag- 
nesium, sulfur,  iron,  nitrogen,  phosphorus,  and  potassium.  None  of 
our  agricultural  plants  can  grow  without  all  of  these.  The  three  ele- 
ments carbon,  hydrogen,  and  oxygen  constitute  90  to  95  percent  of 
the  bulk  of  most  mature  crops,  yet  plants  are  able  to  secure  these  in 
unlimited  amounts  (except  during  drought)  from  air  and  water.  Cal- 
cium, magnesium,  sulfur,  and  iron  are  used  by  garden  plants  in  small 
quantities,  and  as  most  garden  soils  contain  them  in  relatively  large 
amounts,  their  importance  becomes  insignificant.  The  elements  nitro- 
gen, phosphorus,  and  potassium,  however,  are  used  in  considerable 
quantities,  and  as  the  supply  of  these  is  usually  limited,  they  become 
the  controlling  factors  in  crop  production.  Indeed,  it  is  generally  con- 
ceded that  the  supplying  of  these  three  elements  to  the  soil  in  sufficient 
amounts  and  proper  forms,  together  with  favorable  physical  condi- 
tions, constitutes  the  entire  problem  of  soil  enrichment. 


5 


LOSSES  OF  FERTILITY  IN  VEGETABLE  GROWING 

In  order  to  comprehend  fully  the  nature  of  the  fertility  problem 
as  related  to  vegetable  growing,  it  is  well  to  consider  first  the  extent 
and  sources  of  the  losses  of  fertility  from  vegetable  soils;  for  it  is 
recognized  that  for  continued  successful  crop  production,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  return  to  the  soil,  in  some  way  or  other,  as  much  fertility  as 
is  removed  by  the  various  agencies  at  work.  Losses  occur  thru  crop 
removals,  by  drainage  and  leaching,  and  by  oxidation  of  the  nitrogen 
and  organic  matter. 

Losses  in  Crop  Removals 

In  Table  1,  the  amounts  and  commercial  values  of  the  three  limit- 
ing elements  removed  per  acre  by  several  important  vegetable  and 
farm  crops  are  presented. 


Table  1. — Fertility  Removed  per  Acre  by  Important  Vegetables  and 

Farm  Crops1 


Crop 

Estimated 

yield 

Plant  food  removed 

Value  of 
fertility 
removed2 

Nitrogen 

Phosphorus 

Potassium 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Potato 

150  bu. 

30.6 

6.3 

43.2 

$ 9.34 

Sweet  potato 

200  ” 

24.0 

3.5 

30.7 

6.99 

Turnip 

800  ” 

79.2 

13.2 

105.6 

23.50 

Carrot 

500  ” 

55.0 

12.5 

62.5 

15.00 

Parsnip 

600  ” 

160.0 

24.0 

135.0 

42.90 

Onion 

600  ” 

92.3 

20.6 

72.2 

24.85 

Lettuce 

10000  lbs. 

23.0 

3.0 

30.1 

6.71 

Asparagus 

3600  ” 

11.5 

1.4 

3.6 

2.66 

Cabbage 

12  tons 

72.0 

12.0 

86.4 

20.78 

Tomato 

500  bu. 

48.0 

6.6 

67.2 

14.29 

Cucumber 

500  ” 

40.0 

12.5 

50.0 

12.25 

Corn 

100  ” 

100.0 

17.0 

19.0 

22.84 

Wheat 

50  ” 

71.0 

12.0 

13.0 

16.18 

Oats 

75  ” 

49.5 

8.3 

12.0 

11.45 

Compiled  chiefly  after  Wolf  and  Goessman. 

2In  computing  the  values,  20  cents  per  pound  has  been  allowed  for  the  nitro- 
gen, 10  cents  for  the  phosphorus,  and  6 cents  for  the  potassium.  These  are  the 
approximate  prices  prevailing  at  present  for  the  three  elements  in  nitrat^  of 
soda,  steamed  bone  meal,  and  potassium  sulfate. 


It  should  be  noted  that  the  yields  assigned  to  the  vegetables  are 
for  the  most  part  conservative,  while  in  the  case  of  the  three  farm 
crops,  maximum  yields  have  been  allowed.  But  even  comparing  the 
figures  as  they  stand,  it  will  be  seen  that  vegetables  remove  large 
amounts  of  the  three  limiting  elements  from  the  soil, — in  all  proba- 
bility more  than  the  ordinary  farm  crops.  Generally  speaking,  vege- 
tables do  not  remove  as  much  nitrogen  as  the  farm  crops;  there  is 
practically  no  difference  in  the  amounts  of  phosphorus  used;  and 
vegetables  remove  much  more  potassium  than  general  farm  crops. 


6 


Parsnips  are  particularly  heavy  feeders,  the  money  value  of  the  fer- 
tilizing constituents  contained  in  a 600-bushel  crop  being,  at  com- 
mercial prices,  $42.90.  Turnips,  cabbage,  and  onions  are  also  rather 
heavy  feeders.  Lettuce  and  asparagus,  which  are  often  a gardener’s 
most  profitable  crops,  are  very  light  feeders.  The  root  crops,  in  gen- 
eral, remove  large  amounts  of  potassium  from  the  soil. 

The  figures  in  Table  1 account  for  the  removal  of  but  a single 
crop  in  a season.  The  vegetable  grower,  however,  commonly  removes 
two,  and  sometimes  three,  crops  in  a season.  For  instance,  the  grow- 
ing of  a crop  of  both  early  cabbage  and  late  turnips  is  perfectly 
feasible  and  often  practiced.  These  two  crops,  with  the  yields  given 
in  the  table,  would  remove  from  the  land,  151.2  pounds  of  nitrogen, 
25.2  pounds  of  phosphorus,  and  192  pounds  of  potassium,  the  total 
value  at  current  prices  being  $44.28.  A 100-bushel  corn  crop,  on  the 
other  hand,  would  remove  in  the  grain  100  pounds  of  nitrogen,  17 
pounds  of  phosphorus,  and  19  pounds  of  potassium,  worth  $22.84.  It 
is  apparent,  from  these  figures,  that  vegetables  make  heavy  drains 
upon  the  fertility  of  the  soil. 

Losses  by  Drainage  and  Leaching 

If  the  fertility  removed  in  the  crops  constituted  the  total  loss 
from  the  soil,  the  problem  would  not  be  so  difficult,  but  unfortunately 
serious  losses  occur  thru  other  channels  as  well.  Any  fertility  exist- 
ing in  soluble  form  is  likely  to  be  lost  at  any  time  in  drainage  waters 
and  by  leaching  downward  thru  a loose  subsoil.  The  amount  lost  in 
this  way  depends  upon  the  soluble  fertility  present,  the  amount  of 
water  leaving  the  land,  either  by  surface  or  tile  drainage,  and  the 
character  of  the  subsoil, — whether  * ‘ open  ” or  11  tight.  ’ ’ More  soluble 
fertility  exists  in  summer  than  in  winter,  and,  except  in  places  where 
the  winters  are  fairly  mild  and  open,  as  in  southern  Illinois,  drainage 
and  leaching  are  most  active  at  that  time. 

The  amount  of  phosphorus  lost  by  drainage  and  leaching  is  gen- 
erally conceded  to  be  small,  as  little  of  it  exists  in  soluble  form  at 
any  time.  Potassium  is  lost  in  larger  amounts.  Most  soils  contain 
large  amounts  of  this  element,  but  practically  all  of  it  exists  in  very 
insoluble  forms ; hence  the  loss  of  even  part  of  the  small  amount  ex- 
isting in  soluble  condition,  which  is  the  only  kind  plants  can  use,  is 
of  vital  significance  to  the  gardener. 

The  greatest  loss  of  fertility  by  drainage  and  leaching  is  in  the 
nitrogen.  This  is  the  most  deficient  of  the  three  elements  in  a great 
many  vegetable  soils,  and  especially  in  those  which  have  been 
cropped  without  much  attention  to  fertilizing.  It  is  also  the  most  ex- 
pensive to  supply,  costing  in  commercial  forms  about  twenty  cents  a 
pound.  That  much  nitrogen  is  lost  in  this  way  is  proved  by  experi- 
mental evidence  from  several  sources.  The  most  complete  tests  have 
been  made  by  Lawes  and  Gilbert  at  Pothamsted,  England.  During 


7 


four  years  they  found  that  the  drainage  thru  40  inches  of  soil  from 
land  receiving  15.7  tons  of  manure  annually  contained,  on  an  average, 
16.27  pounds  of  nitrogen  per  million  pounds  of  water.  Unfortunately, 
the  amount  of  drainage  from  this  land  was  not  measured.  From  un- 
cropped land,  however,  the  average  drainage  for  31  years  was  14.73 
inches,  but  it  was  not  likely  so  great  as  this  from  the  cropped  land. 
Granting  a drainage  of  10  inches,  which  is  their  estimate  from  the  or- 
dinary cropped  land  at  Rothamsted,  the  above  amount  would  result  in 
a loss  of  36.6  pounds  of  nitrogen  per  acre  annually.  The  average  an- 
nual rainfall  at  Rothamsted  is  28.02  inches,  while  in  Illinois  it  varies 
from  33.48  inches  in  the  northern  part  to  42.19  inches  in  the  southern 
part,  the  average  for  the  state  being  37.39  inches.1  Thus  the  drainage 
from  Illinois  soils  is  likely  much  greater  than  from  those  at  Rotham- 
sted. Furthermore,  a greater  quantity  of  manure  than  15.7  tons  per 
acre  annually  is  often  used  on  garden  soils  in  Illinois.  There  is,  there- 
fore, a probability  of  much  greater  loss  of  nitrogen  from  Illinois  gar- 
den soils  by  drainage  and  leaching  than  occurred  in  the  investigations 
described  above. 

Losses  of  Organic  Matter  and  Nitrogen  by  Oxidation 

Besides  the  losses  of  nitrogen  in  crop  removals,  in  drainage 
waters,  and  by  leaching,  there  is  a large  loss  by  oxidation  of  the  humus 
of  the  soil,  which  is  organic  matter  in  an  advanced  stage  of  decay. 
The  loss  by  this  means  can  best  be  understood  and  appreciated  by  re- 
flecting how  quickly  a pile  of  weeds  or  other  organic  substance  dis- 
appears. We  say  it  “rots.’’  In  chemical  terms  we  call  the  process 
“oxidation,”  and  it  consists  in  a combining  of  the  substances  com- 
posing the  rubbish  with  the  oxygen  of  the  air.  Most  of  the  com- 
pounds formed  are  gases  and  pass  off  into  the  air.  All  dead  plant 
and  animal  substances,  including  the  humus  of  the  soil,  are  subject 
to  oxidation.  The  more  contact  there  is  with  the  air,  other  things 
being  equal,  the  more  rapidly  oxidation  proceeds.  Humus  contains 
from  90  to  95  percent  of  the  nitrogen  of  the  soil,  and  about  one- 
sixteenth  of  the  humus  is  nitrogen ; hence,  anything  which  affects  the 
humus  affects  the  nitrogen  also.  The  immense  amount  of  tillage  nec- 
essary in  vegetable  growing  is  constantly  bringing  the  humus,  nearly 
all  of  which  is  contained  in  the  surface,  or  plowed  soil,  into  contact 
with  the  air,  about  one-fifth  of  which  is  oxygen.  Under  these  condi- 
tions the  loss  of  humus  and  nitrogen  by  oxidation  must  proceed  at  a 
rapid  rate.  Furthermore,  vegetable  crops  shade  the  ground  but  little, 
and  the  free  movement  of  the  air  and  the  direct  action  of  the  sun  aid 


Til.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  86. 


8 


the  process.  It  would  be  difficult  to  determine  just  how  much  loss 
occurs  in  this  way,  but  that  it  is  large  there  can  be  no  doubt.1 

How  to  Check  the  Losses  of  Fertility 

The  losses  of  fertility  in  crops  sold  from  the  land  cannot  be 
checked,  and  no  one  desires  that  they  should  be.  Losses  in  drainage 
waters  and  by  leaching,  however,  can  be  checked  to  a certain  extent 
by  proper  methods.  The  land  should  be  so  handled  that  surface  drain- 
age will  be  reduced  to  a minimum.  On  rolling  land,  plowing  should 
be  done  in  contour  fashion,  so  that  the  furrows  will  extend  crosswise 
of  the  slope  rather  than  up  and  down  it.  In  planting,  the  rows  should 
also  extend  crosswise  of  the  slope.  It  is  a good  plan  to  plow  the  land 
(unless  it  is  hilly)  in  the  fall,  and  to  leave  it  “ rough ” thru  the 
winter,2  as  this  will  lessen  the  surface  drainage. 

When  the  land  is  not  needed  for  a regular  crop,  it  is  far  better 
to  sow  it  to  a cover  crop  than  to  leave  it  bare.  Tliruout  the  grow- 
ing season,  the  soil  organisms  are  constantly  converting  nitrogen  into 
soluble  forms  by  a process  called  nitrification ; and  other  plant  food 
is  becoming  soluble  because  of  other  influences.  Much  of  this  plant 
food,  as  it  becomes  soluble,  will  be  absorbed  by  a growing  crop,  but 
if  the  land  is  left  bare,  this  plant  food  is  largely  lost  by  drainage  and 
leaching.  The  Rothamsted  drainage  experiments  cited  show  that  a 
much  larger  amount  of  nitrogen  existed  in  the  drainage  waters  when 
the  land  was  bare  than  when  occupied  by  a growing  crop.  From  an- 
other source,3  it  is  reported  that  the  loss  of  nitrogen  was  twenty  times 
greater  from  bare  land  than  from  land  occupied  by  rape  or  grass. 
These  differences  were  no  doubt  due  to  the  fact  that  the  growing 
crops  had  absorbed  most  of  the  soluble  nitrogen,  while  it  was  largely 
lost  from  the  bare  land  by  drainage  and  leaching.  The  fertility  gath- 
ered in  this  way  by  cover  crops  will,  of  course,  be  returned  to  the 
soil  when  they  are  plowed  under. 

Not  a great  deal  of  the  loss  of  organic  matter  by  oxidation  can 
be  prevented.  Crops  must  be  well  cultivated ; however,  there  should 

lrrhese  losses  of  fertility  are  partly  balanced  by  small  gains  thru  natural 
causes  which  should  be  mentioned,  but  which,  so  far  as  is  known,  are  of  no 
practical  significance  in  solving  the  problem.  Investigations  from  a number  of 
sources  indicate  that  probably  from  5 to  10  pounds  of  nitrogen  are  brought  to 
the  earth  in  rain  water  annually.  There  are  some  indications  that  where  legumes 
are  grown  the  tubercle  barteria  continue  to  fix  a small  amount  of  nitrogen  in  the 
soil  after  the  death  of  their  hosts.  Soil  organisms  called  azotobacter  fix  some 
atmospheric  nitrogen  besides  that  collected  by  the  legume  bacteria.  While  the 
gain  from  these  sources  is  a help,  it  is  generally  believed  to  be  of  little  signifi- 
cance in  solving  the  nitrogen  problem. 

2There  would  be  exception  to  this  in  the  case  of  land  to  be  devoted  to  early 
crops,  which  will  dry  out  earlier  if  worked  to  a smooth  surface  after  plowing  in 
the  fall. 

3Del.  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  60,  p.  29. 


9 


be  no  more  cultivation  than  is  necessary  to  conserve  moisture  and  de- 
stroy weeds.  Cover  crops,  besides  locking  in  their  tissues  soluble 
plant  food,  as  mentioned  above,  will  aid  in  checking  oxidation  by 
shading  the  soil  and  by  hindering  the  movement  of  the  air  at  the 
surface.  Furthermore,  when  turned  under,  they  will  aid  in  replen- 
ishing the  supply  of  organic  matter  in  the  soil. 

Probable  Losses  of  Fertility  Annually 

After  all  feasible  precautions  have  been  taken  to  check  the  losses 
of  fertility  from  the  soil,  it  will  be  found  that  large  losses  still  occur. 
Minnesota  experiments  (Minnesota  Bulletin  53)  indicate  that  for  24.5 
pounds  of  nitrogen  removed  annually  per  acre  in  the  crops  in  con- 
tinuous wheat  raising,  a total  of  171  pounds  per  acre  was  lost  from 
the  land.  There  were  certain  circumstances  in  these  experiments 
which  might  admit  of  the  figures  being  somewhat  at  error,  but  even 
granting  some  discrepancy,  the  results  are  very  significant.  After 
further  tests  by  the  same  station  (Minnesota  Bulletin  94),  it  was  con- 
cluded that  from  three  to  five  times  as  much  nitrogen  is  lost  from  the 
soil  annually  as  is  removed  in  crops.  In  Canada1  Professor  Shutt 
found  that  in  twenty-two  years,  during  which  time  six  crops  of  wheat, 
four  of  barley,  and  three  of  oats  were  grown,  with  nine  fallows  inter- 
posed, practically  one-third  of  the  nitrogen  content  of  the  soil  to  a 
depth  of  eight  inches  was  lost. 

There  are  no  investigations  known  to  the  writer  which  indicate 
the  loss  of  fertility  in  vegetable  growing,  and  it  is  more  or  less  hazard- 
ous to  make  an  estimate.  Taking  everything  into  consideration,  how- 
ever, it  will  certainly  be  within  the  facts  to  assume  that  where  vege- 
tables are  grown  on  an  intensive  basis,  there  is  an  average  annual  loss 
per  acre  of  200  pounds  of  nitrogen,  25  pounds  of  phosphorus,  and  100 
pounds  of  potassium.  The  stock  of  these  elements,  especially  that  of 
nitrogen  and  phosphorus,  is  none  too  large  to  begin  with,  even  in  our 
best  soils.  Plants  can  use  each  year  only  a very  small  part  of  that 
which  is  present,  probably  not  over  % to  1 percent.  Hence,  it  re- 
quires only  the  simplest  kind  of  reasoning  to  convince  one  that  for 
the  continued  production  of  profitable  crops,  we  must  supply  to  the 
soil,  in  some  way,  as  much  fertility  as  is  removed.  If  we  are  to  in- 
crease the  productivity  we  must  supply,  at  least  for  a while,  more 
than  this  amount. 

• SUPPLYING  FERTILITY  TO  THE  SOIL 

The  supplying  of  fertility  to  the  soil  is  not  merely  a matter  of 
furnishing  fertilizers  carrying  a sufficient  amount  of  the  elements  to 
offset  the  needs,  either  in  vegetable  or  any  other  kind  of  crop  pro- 


Tleport  of  Dominion  Experiment  Farms,  1905. 


10 


duction.  The  amount  and  form  of  fertilizer  used  and  the  type  and 
condition  of  the  soil  have  an  important  bearing  on  the  matter.  This 
is  especially  true  in  vegetable  gardening,  where  so  many  of  the  plants 
grown  are  peculiarly  sensitive  to  surrounding  conditions. 

Nitrogen  and  Organic  Matter 

The  nitrogen  and  organic  matter  are  so  closely  associated  that 
they  can  scarcely  be  discussed  separately.  Nitrogen  has  much  to  do 
with  the  vegetative  growth  or  size  of  a plant.  Organic  matter  has 
many  offices  in  the  soil.  It  gives  ‘ ‘life ” to  the  soil;  it  improves  the 
texture ; it  increases  the  water-holding  capacity ; it  makes  soils  more 
resistant  to  drought;  it  darkens  the  color  of  light  soils  and  makes 
them  warmer  in  early  spring;  it  promotes  the  growth  of  organisms 
engaged  in  making  insoluble  plant  food  soluble ; it  contains  from  90 
to  95  percent  of  the  nitrogen  of  the  soil ; and  thru  its  decay  it  renders 
mineral  forms  of  fertility  available  for  plant  use.  Its  presence  in 
large  amounts  is  absolutely  imperative  if  success  is  to  be  attained  in 
the  use  of  commercial  fertilizers.  The  excessive  use  of  commercial 
fertilizers  on  soils  deficient  in  organic  matter  is  responsible  in  a large 
degree  for  “soil  sickness,”  “malnutrition,”  and  the  “physiological 
diseases”  that  are  becoming  so  common  in  some  trucking  sections  of 
the  country.  In  view  of  the  importance  of  organic  matter  and  nitro- 
gen, and  the  fact  that  large  amounts  of  these  are  lost  from  vegetable 
soils,  as  already  explained,  gardeners  should  direct  especial  attention 
toward  maintaining  a plentiful  supply  of  both  in  the  soil.  Organic 
matter  and  nitrogen  may  be  provided  by  plowing  under  manure,  crop 
refuse,  and  crops  grown  for  that  purpose.  Peat,  muck,  and  other 
materials  rich  in  organic  matter  may  be  used  where  available.  In 
addition,  nitrogen  may  be  furnished  by  commercial  fertilizers. 

MANURE,  ITS  CARE  AND  USE 

Manure  is  without  doubt  the  best  general  fertilizer  for  vegetable 
crops,  tho  it  can  usually  be  supplemented  profitably  by  such  fertilizers 
as  bone  meal,  rock  phosphate,  and  potassium  sulfate.  A ton  of  ordi- 
nary barnyard  manure  contains  about  10  pounds  of  nitrogen,  3 pounds 
of  phosphorus,  and  8 pounds  of  potassium.  Its  composition  varies 
much,  according  to  its  moisture*  content  and  to  the  kind  of  animals  and 
the  feed  they  receive.  Besides  the  fertilizing  elements,  manure  supplies 
a large  amount  of  the  very  best  kind  of  organic  matter.  A small  quan- 
tity of  actively  decaying  organic  matter,  as  is  furnished  in  manure,  is 
often  more  effective  in  the  soil  than  a much  greater  amount  of  older 
and  less  active  organic  matter.  Manure  also  exerts  a marked  stimulat- 
ing influence  on  soils  at  times.  There  are  instances  on  record  in  which 
the  increase  alone  in  the  yields  caused  by  manure  contained  mere  of 


11 


certain  elements  than  was  supplied  by  the  manure.  Such  occurrences 
are  no  doubt  due  to  its  effect  in  releasing  insoluble  forms  of  fertility 
in  the  soil.  Manure,  therefore,  is  valuable  both  for  the  elements  it 
carries  and  for  its  favorable  physical  and  chemical  effects. 

While  every  gardener  recognizes  the  value  of  manure,  the  proper 
care  of  it  is  not  always  understood.  The  waste  of  manures  in  vege- 
table growing  is  tremendous.  It  is  a common  practice  to  haul  manure 
from  cars  or  from  the  city  and  to  place  it  in  great  piles  along  the 
roadside  or  in  fields,  leaving  it  there  for  weeks ; to  allow  it  to  lie  on 
the  soil  for  a long  time  before  plowing  it  under ; and  to  throw  it  out 
in  the  barnyard  to  lie  over  winter.  These  practices  are  all  very  waste- 
ful and  should  be  avoided.  The  Ohio  Experiment  Station1  found 
that  in  three  months  (from  January  to  April)  38.75  percent  of  the 
organic  matter,  30.29  percent  of  the  nitrogen,  23.76  percent  of  the 
phosphorus,  and  58.84  percent  of  the  potassium  were  lost  from  manure 
piaced  in  flat  piles  in  the  barnyard.  At  the  Maryland  Station2  eighty 
tons  of  manure  allowed  to  lie  in  an  uncovered  pile  were  reduced  to 
27  tons  at  the  end  of  the  year’s  time.  At  the  New  York  Cornell  Sta- 
tion 4000  pounds  of  horse  manure  decreased  to  1770  pouncte  from 
April  25  to  September  22,  and  its  fertilizing  elements  decreased  in 
value  during  the  same  time  from  $5.48  to  $2.03.  In  another  Cornell 
test  lasting  six  months,  exposed  manure  lost  56  percent  in  weight  of 
dry  matter  and  43  percent  in  plant-food  value.  In  Canada,  two  tons 
of  manure,  containing  1938  pounds  of  organic  matter,  were  exposed 
from  April  29  to  August  29, — four  months.  The  organic  matter  was 
reduced  during  that  time  to  655  pounds,  and  the  nitrogen  content 
decreased  from  48.1  pounds  to  27.7  pounds. 

Thus  it  is  seen  that  manure  deteriorates  rapidly  under  improper 
methods  of  management.  Fortunately,  most  of  this  loss  can  be  pre- 
vented. Broadly  speaking,  the  greatest  proportion  of  fertility  is  con- 
served when  the  manure  is  applied  in  the  freshest  condition  possible 
and  plowed  under  immediately.  It  would  be  unwise,  however,  to  use 
fresh  manure  in  large  quantities  just  before  planting  in  spring  or 
summer.  The  ideal  method  is  to  apply  and  plow  under  all  manure 
in  the  fall,  for  it  will  then  rot  before  spring  and  no  evil  results  are 
likely  to  follow.  But  it  is  rarely  possible  to  follow  this  plan  exclu- 
sively, for  in  practical  market  gardening,  manure  must  be  secured 
when  available,  which  may  be  at  any  time  of  the  year. 

The  horse  manure  produced  at  home  should  not  be  allowed  to  ac- 
cumulate in  the  stalls  for  longer  than  a few  days  at  a time.  Prefera- 
bly it  should  be  applied  as  soon  as  possible  after  being  made  and  should 
be  plowed  under  at  the  first  opportunity.  At  times  when  the  land  is 
occupied  by  growing  crops,  the  manure  is  best  conserved  by  placing 


1Ohio  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  183,  . p.  205. 

2Md.  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  122,  p.  137. 


12 


it  under  cover  or  in  a basin  or  pit  in  the  barnyard.  If,  in  addition,  it 
can  be  firmly  packed,  and  saturated  with  water  occasionally,  the  losses 
will  be  reduced  to  the  minimum  under  the  circumstances.  It  is  well 
to  apply  and  plow  under  such  manure  as  soon  as  possible. 

Manure  obtained  during  the  winter  should  not  be  stored  in  large 
piles.  Neither  should  it  be  dropped  in  small  piles  about  the  fields,  as 
is  so  often  done.  It  is  best  to  broadcast  it  as  hauled.  Preferably,  it 
should  be  used  on  land  that  is  not  to  be  planted  to  early  spring  crops, 
for  manure  applied  during  winter  often  greatly  interferes  with 
the  drying  out  and  warming  of  the  soil  in  the  spring  and  delays  the 
planting.  Land  intended  for  early  crops  should  be  manured  in  the 
fall  and  plowed  in  narrow  ‘ ‘ lands,  ” in  ridge  fashion.  It  is  also  well 


Fig.  1. — Manure  Left  Lying  by  the  Roadside — a Too  Common  Practice  in 

Southern  Illinois 

to  use  manure  secured  in  winter  on  level  rather  than  on  rolling  lands, 
for  less  loss  by  drainage  will  then  occur.  Rolling  lands  are  usually 
best  treated  by  manuring  and  plowing  in  the  fall. 

It  often  becomes  necessary,  because  of  contracts  and  other  reasons, 
to  haul  manure  during  the  summer.  Its  handling  at  this  time  is  an 
important  matter,  and  one  in  which  many  costly  mistakes  are  made. 
If  possible,  the  manure  should  be  applied  to  a vacant  area  not  needed 
for  another  crop,  and  plowed  under  immediately.  But  all  the  land 
is  sometimes  occupied  with  crops,  and  some  other  disposition  must  be 
made.  The  best  way  to  treat  such  manure  is  to  place  it  in  flat  piles 
not  over  three  or  four  feet  in  depth,  pack  it  down  thoroly,  and  soak 
it  with  water  every  week  or  two.  Crop  remains  and  other  refuse  are 
often  mixed  with  the  manure  in  composting.  Sometimes,  soil  and 


13 


manure  are  placed  in  alternate  layers.  These  treatments  aid  in  check- 
ing fermentation  and  probably  effect  a saving  in  the  manure. 

In  traveling  thru  the  trucking  district  of  southern  Illinois,  one 
often  sees  great  piles  of  manure  along  the  roadside.  It  is  placed  there 
as  hauled  from  the  cars,  usually  when  the  roads  are  bad  or  during 
summer  when  the  land  is  occupied.  Sometimes,  when  the  hauling 
distance  is  great,  it  is  unloaded  a short  distance  from  town  in  order 
to  empty  the  car  in  the  required  time.  But  the  significant  point  is 
that  it  is  often  left  in  such  places  for  weeks.  This  is  a very  wasteful 
practice  and  should  be  avoided  when  at  all  possible.  If  the  manure 
cannot  be  hauled  directly  to  the  field  and  spread  out,  it  should  be 
piled  inside  the  field  in  preference  to  unloading  it  on  the  roadside.  If 
it  must  be  placed  on  the  roadside,  it  should  be  left  there  for  the  short- 
est time  possible. 

When  the  supply  of  manure  is  limited,  the  question  arises  as  to 
how  to  make  the  best  use  of  the  amount  at  hand.  This  is  often  the 
case  the  first  two  or  three  years  vegetables  are  being  grown  on  a piece 
of  land,  and  before  there  has  been  sufficient  time  to  build  it  up  in 
fertility.  In  such  cases,  better  results  as  a whole  will  ordinarily  be 
secured  by  spreading  the  manure  out  thinly  over  a relatively  large 
area  than  by  applying  it  heavily  to  a small  patch.  With  some  crops, 
chief  among  which  are  melons  and  cucumbers,  the  manure  can  be 
made  to  reach  much  further  by  applying  it  under  the  hills.  In  ex- 
periments conducted  by  this  station1  with  muskmelons  in  southern. 
Illinois,  larger  yields  were  obtained  from  4.5  tons  per  acre  of  rotted 
manure  applied  under  the  hills  than  from  16.5  tons  applied  broad- 
cast before  plowing.  It  should  be  emphasized  that  manure  used  in 
this  way  should  be  thoroly  rotted,  for  undecomposed  manure  applied 
under  hills  almost  invariably  causes  injury  by  its  “ burning’ ’ effect. 
There  may  be  exception  to  this,  however,  during  a cool,  moist  season. 
Manure  used  under  hills  should  always  be  thoroly  compacted  before 
planting  the  crop. 

The  composting  of  manure  is  such  a common  practice  among  vege- 
table growers  that  it  warrants  specific  attention.  Many  of  the  older 
publications  on  vegetable  gardening  place  great  emphasis  on  the  super- 
iority of  composted  manure,  and  we  find  many  gardeners  composting 
all  or  nearly  all  of  the  manure  used.  The  process  consists  in  placing 
the  manure  in  flat-topped  piles  three  or  four  feet  in  depth  (just  deep 
enough  to  prevent  heavy  rains  from  soaking  thru  and  leaching  out  the 
plant  food),  and  forking  it  over  every  week  or  two.  Water  is  often 
used  in  addition.  The  result  is  that  fermentation  is  greatly  increased 
for  a time,  and  that  a uniform  degree  of  decay  is  secured  thruout  the 
pile.  The  rotted  manure  obtained  by1  this  treatment  is  very  valuable 
for  hotbed  and  greenhouse  work  and  for  use  under  the  hills  of  some 


TIL  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  155. 


14 


^rops  in  the  field,  and  it  may  be  applied  during  spring  and  summer 
with  less  danger  of  injury  than  fresh  manure.  One  should  bear  in 
mind,  however,  that  even  with  the  best  management  a large  loss  of 
fertilizing  value  occurs  in  composting,  as  already  shown.  It  is  no 
doubt  advisable  for  gardeners  to  compost  sufficient  manure  (and  it  is 
best  to  use  manure  secured  during  summer,  since  this  is  the  most  dif- 
ficult to  conserve)  to  meet  their  needs  for  the  purposes  above  men- 
tioned, for  even  tho  quite  a loss  of  plant  food  occurs,  nothing  can  take 
its  place  for  such  work.  From  the  standpoint  of  the  most  economic 
use  of  the  fertilizer  at  hand,  however,  composting  is  very  wasteful  of 
plant  food  and  should  be  avoided  as  a general  practice. 


THE  USE  OF  CROP  REFUSE  AND  COVER  CROPS 

Manure  is  without  doubt  the  best  general  fertilizer  for  the  vege- 
table grower;  and  where  it  can  be  obtained  at  a reasonable  figure,  it 
is  best  to  depend  chiefly  upon  it,  tho  in  any  case  its  value  may  usually 


Fig.  2. — The  Disk-harrow  is  a Useful  Implement  for  Cutting  Up  Crop  Ee- 
mains  Preparatory  to  Plowing  Them  Under 


be  enhanced  by  the  use  of  the  proper  commercial  fertilizers  in  con- 
junction, as  will  be  described  later.  In  intensive  market  gardening, 
where  the  land  is  nearly  always  high  in  value  and  must  be  occupied 
by  money  crops  thruout  the  growing  season,  manure  is  also  one  of  the 
cheapest  sources  of  fertility.  However,  in  less  intensive  work,  as  in 
truck  farming,  it  is  not  always  feasible  to  obtain  a sufficient  amount  of 
manure  to  meet  the  needs,  and  it  becomes  necessary  to  turn  to  other 
sources  for  the  nitrogen  and  organic  matter  requirements.  Fortu- 
nately, there  are  other  ways  by  which  these  may  be  secured. 


15 


Many  gardeners  remove  crop  remains  and  weeds  from  the  land 
or  burn  them.  Whatever  may  be  said  in  favor  of  these  methods  from 
other  standpoints,  they  are  bad  procedure  from  the  fertility  stand- 
point. All  the  nitrogen  and  organic  matter  contained  in  the  growth 
is  lost  to  the  soil  by  either  method.  Unless  it  is  absolutely  necessary, 
in  order  to  control  some  serious  disease,  injurious  insect,  or  weed, 
crop  refuse  and  weed  growth  should  never  be  removed  from  the  land. 
Instead,  they  should  be  plowed  into  the  soil,  and  in  such  cases  it  is 
well  to  plow  early  in  the  fall,  in  order  that  the  vegetation  will  have 
opportunity  to  rot  before  spring.  In  the  case  of  tomato  vines,  cab- 
bage stumps,  and  other  refuse  which  rots  slowly  in  the  soil,  it  is 
better  to  mix  them  with  manure  and  compost  them  until  disintegrated, 
than  to  burn  them  or  cast  them  into  a ditch. 


Fig.  3. — Weeds  Can  Sometimes  Be  Used  as  a Source  of  Organic  Matter 


The  amount  of  organic  matter  and  nitrogen  obtainable  from  crop 
refuse  and  weeds  (in  good  gardening)  is  at  best  small,  and  it  is  usu- 
ally necessary,  where  the  manure  supply  is  limited,  to  grow  cover 
crops  in  addition  in  order  to  maintain  the  supply  of  humus  in  the 
soil.  Many  gardeners  go  to  great  trouble  and  expense  in  hauling 
manure,  and  neglect  splendid  opportunities  to  grow  cover  crops.  With 
a little  attention  in  this  direction  they  could  easily  make  possible  the 
use  of  less  manure.  The  nature  of  the  gardening  business  makes  the 
use  of  cover  crops  an  extremely  practicable  and  inexpensive  method  of 
maintaining  the  supply  of  organic  matter  in  the  soil.  Many  of  the  reg- 
ular crops  will  admit  of  cover  crops  being  sown  at  the  time  of  their  last 


16 


cultivation,  while  others  mature  early  enough  in  the  season  to  allow 
plenty  of  time  for  growing  a cover  crop  afterward. 

There  are  a number  of  cover  crops  well  adapted  for  growth  in 
connection  with  vegetables  in  Illinois.  Perhaps  the  most  important 
of  these  are  oats,  rape,  rye,  cowpeas,  soybeans,  and  hairy  sketch.  From 
the  standpoint  of  their  value  as  cover  crops  these  are  divided  into  two 
classes,  leguminous  and  non-leguminous. 

Oats,  rape,  and  rye  are  non-leguminous  crops,  and  in  this  con- 
nection are  valuable  only  for  the  organic  matter  they  furnish.  Oats 
grow  rapidly,  but  of  course  die  with  the  first  freeze,  and  should  there- 


Fig.  4. — Cowpea  Foot  Showing  Nodules  in  Which  Live  the  Nitrogen- 
gathering Bacteria 


17 


fore  be  planted  early  enough  to  permit  them  to  make  a good  growth. 
Rape  requires  practically  the  same  conditions  as  oats.  It  is  best  to 
plow  under  both  of  these  crops  as  soon  as  destroyed  by  frost.  Rye 
possesses  certain  advantages  which  make  it  a valuable  cover  crop. 
It  may  be  sown  later  than  any  of  those  mentioned,  making  a fair 
growth  when  planted  as  late  as  October  1 to  15.  It  thrives  even  on 
poor  soils,  and  it  lives  thru  the  winter  without  difficulty.  When  rye 
is  used  for  soil  improvement,  it  should  be  turned  under  in  early 
spring,  for  it  robs  the  soil  of  moisture  if  allowed  to  remain  too  long 
and  in  addition  locks  in  its  tissues  plant  food  that  will  not  again  be 
available  for  plant  use  until  the  vegetation  has  rotted. 

Cowpeas,  soybeans,  and  hairy  vetch1  are  legumes.  These  crops 
not  only  furnish  organic  matter  when  turned  under,  but  they  are 
capable  of  adding  nitrogen  also.  Thru  bacteria  living  in  nodules  on 
their  roots  (see  Fig.  4)  they  are  capable  of  appropriating  free  nitro- 
gen from  the  air,  of  which  about  75  percent  is  nitrogen.  They  are, 
therefore,  more  desirable  cover  crops  than  oats,  rape,  and  rye  when 
they  can  be  grown.  The  amounts  of  organic  matter  and  nitrogen 
contained  in  crops  of  these  legumes  are  shown  by  tests  conducted  at 
the  Delaware  and  New  York  Cornell  Experiment  Stations. 

In  the  Delaware  tests,  sowings  of  these  three  legumes,  among 
others,  were  made  on  July  22.  Table  2 shows  the  amounts  of  dry 
matter  and  nitrogen  contained  in  the  growth  per  acre  in  November  of 
the  same  year.  The  tests  show  that  soybeans  made  practically  twice 
as  much  growth  and  contained  twice  as  much  nitrogen  as  cowpeas. 
Vetch  made  less  than  half  as  much  organic  matter  as  soybeans,  but 
contained  nearly  as  much  nitrogen,  since  it  was  richer  in  that  element 
than  the  soybeans, 


Table  2. — Dry  Matter  and  Nitrogen  in  Growth  per  Acre:1 
Delaware  Experiments 

(Expressed  in  pounds) 


•Legume 

Dry  matter 

Nitrogen 

In  tops 

In  roots 

In  tops  and  roots 

Soybeans 

6790 

756 

140.2 

Cowpeas 

3718 

310 

69.5 

Hairy  vetch 

3064 

600 

121.2 

Compiled  from  Del.  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  60. 


The  Cornell  tests  include  comparisons  of  cowpeas  and  vetch  only. 
The  following  amounts  of  dry  matter  and  nitrogen  were  contained  in 
the  growth  per  acre  from  seedage  on  July  18,  the  samples  being  taken 
November  10.  Naturally,  the  conclusions  were  that  vetch  was  the 
better  crop  to  grow  for  soil  improvement  purposes. 

1Crimson  clover  is  an  admirable  cover  crop  in  some  parts  of  tne  country,  but 
unfortunately  this  plant  cannot  withstand  the  severe  winters  in  Illinois. 


18 


Table  3. — Dry  Matter  and  Nitrogen  in  Growth  per  Acre: 
Cornell  Experiments1 

(Expressed  in  pounds) 


Legume 

Dry  matter 

Nitrogen 

In  tops 

In  roots 

In  tops  and  roots 

Hairy  vetch 

6824 

567 

256.1 

Cowpeas 

2622 

454 

52.6 

Compiled  from  N.  Y.  Cornell  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  198. 


The  results  obtained  in  the  two  places  are  not  consistent,  but  the 
differences  are  no  doubt  due  to  differences  in  soil.  At  any  rate,  the 
results  from  both  places  serve  to  show  that  these  legumes  are  capable 
of  supplying  large  amounts  of  organic  matter  and  nitrogen  to  the 
soil.  Which  of  the  three  is  the  best  to  grow  will  no  doubt  be  deter- 
mined largely  by  local  conditions. 

There  are,  however,  some  points  in  favor  of  vetch  which  are  not 
brought  out  by  the  above  figures.  It  should  be  noted  that  in  both 
cases  the  samples  of  all  the  crops  were  taken  in  the  fall.  But  vetch 
lives  thru  the  winter  and  makes  some  growth  during  mild  periods  and 
in  early  spring  before  it  is  turned  under,  while  cowpeas  and  soy- 
beans die  in  the  fall  with  the  first  hard  frost.  Thus,  in  the  above  tests, 
cowpeas  and  soybeans  had  completed  their  growth  and  ceased  opera- 
tions, while  vetch  had  not.  Another  point  in  favor  of  vetch  is  that 
it  is  better  adapted  for  sowing  between  many  vegetable  crops  before 
the  last  cultivation,  for  it  grows  slowly  at  the  start,  and  therefore 
offers  little,  if  any,  competition  before  the  crop  reaches  maturity. 
Furthermore,  vetch  will  stand  the  tramping  necessary  in  harvesting 
the  regular  crop.  Everything  considered,  it  appears  that  hairy  vetch 
is  one  of  the  very  best  crops  which  can  be  grown  in  connection  with 
vegetables  in  Illinois  for  soil  improvement.  The  hairy  vetch  (Vicia 
villosa)  is  the  only  one  that  will  live  thru  the  winter,  and  it  is  there- 
fore the  only  one  which  should  be  planted  in  this  state.  The  one  dis- 
couraging feature  about  the  use  of  vetch  is  the  high  price  of  the  seed. 

It  is  impossible  to  draw  any  direct  conclusions  as  to  whether  cow- 
peas or  soybeans  are  the  better.  Where  soybeans  will  grow  well,  they 
are  the  better  crop  of  the  two,  for  they  make  a larger  growth,  bear 
about  ten  bushels  more  seed  to  the  acre,  and  are  not  so  injured  by  light 
frosts  as  cowpeas.  On  soils  fairly  rich  to  begin  with,  and  in  the  north- 
ern half  of  the  state,  soybeans  are  no  doubt  the  better  crop  to  grow. 
Ebony  is  a good  variety  for  the  southern  part  of  the  state,  and  Medium 
Yellow  (also  called  Iota  San)  for  the  northern  part.  Whippoorwill 
and  New  Era  are  good  varieties  of  cowpeas. 

Legumes  do  not  secure  all  the  nitrogen  they  contain  from  the  air, 
but  they  secure  a larger  percentage  when  the  soil  is  poor  in  that  ele- 
ment than  when  it  is  rich  in  it.  Cowpeas  appear  to  be  able  to  obtain 


19 


as  much  as  73  percent  of  their  nitrogen  from  the  air  under  certain 
conditions,  according  to  tests  made  by  this  station.1  Soybeans  do  not 
appear  capable  of  appropriating  such  a large  percentage.2  It  may  be 


Fig.  5. — Whippoorwill  Cowpeas 


safely  assumed  that,  as  a rule,  legumes  secure  from  one-third  to  two- 
thirds  of  their  nitrogen  from  the  air  under  favorable  conditions. 


1I11.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  94. 

2Wis.  Exp.  Sta.  Rpt.,  1907. 


20 


The  three  crops  mentioned — cowpeas,  soybeans,  and  hairy  vetch— 
seem  capable  of  appropriating  some  nitrogen  from  the  air  when  grown 
in  soils  which  contain  some  acid,  but  they  make  a distinctly  better 
growth,  and  undoubtedly  collect  more  nitrogen,  in  soils  which  have 
been  limed. 

The  soil  must  be  well  inoculated  with  the  proper  bacteria  if 
legumes  are  to  accomplish  the  best  results  in  gathering  nitrogen.  Fre- 
quently the  large  seeds  of  those  mentioned  have  sufficient  bacteria 
clinging  to  them  for  this  purpose;  but  it  is  wise,  when  a legume  is 
being  grown  on  the  land  for  the  first  time,  to  introduce  these  organ- 
isms artificially.  This  may  be  readily  accomplished  by  securing  soil 
from  an  area  which  has  recently  grown  a well-inoculated  crop  of  the 
legume  (indicated  by  an  abundance  of  nodules  on  the  roots),  and 
scattering  it  over  the  land  to  be  planted.  It  is  well  to  do  this  on  a 
cloudy  day,  and  to  harrow  or  disk  the  land  as  soon  as  possible  after 
the  application,  for  the  bacteria  are  quickly  killed  by  the  sun. 

It  is  generally  held  that  legumes  contain  as  large  a percentage 
of  nitrogen  when  they  are  in  full  bloom  as  they  ever  will  contain. 
So  far  as  their  nitrogen-gathering  power  is  concerned,  therefore,  it  is 
as  well  to  turn  them  under  at  this  time  as  at  any  other.  No  disad- 
vantage results,  however,  from  allowing  them  to  grow  longer. 

The  amount  of  nitrogen  which  legumes  can  collect  from  the  air 
depends,  therefore,  upon  the  legume  used,  the  amount  of  growth  made, 
the  amount  of  nitrogen  in  the  soil,  the  character  of  the  soil, — whether 
acid  or  neutral, — inoculation  with  the  proper  bacteria,  and  the  time 
the  crops  are  plowed  under.  Under  favorable  conditions,  the  legumes 
which  might  be  grown  in  connection  with  vegetables  (if  all  the  growth 
is  plowed  under)  could  probably  be  depended  upon  to  add  to  the 
soil  from  50  to  100  pounds  of  nitrogen  per  acre  in  a season.  In  addi- 
tion they  will  add  large  amounts  of  organic  matter.  Thus  it  will  be 
seen  that  these  crops  are  of  very  great  value  to  the  gardener  in  main- 
taining the  high  state  of  fertility  so  necessary  for  successful  vegetable 
growing. 

THE  USE  OF  COMMERCIAL  FORMS  OF  NITROGEN 

Besides  using  liberal  quantities  of  manure  and  paying  close  at- 
tention to  crop  refuse  and  cover  crops,  the  gardener  will  often  find 
commercial  forms  of  nitrogen  profitable.  The  following  are  among 
those  in  most  common  use. 


Table  4. — Important  Commercial  Forms  of  Nitrogen 


Pounds  nitrogen1 
per  ton 

Cost 
per  ton 

Cost  per 
pound 

Nitrate  of  soda 

310 

$60.00 

$ .193 

Dried  blood 

280 

54.50 

.194 

Sulfate  of  ammonia 

400 

75.00 

.187 

1The  amount  of  nitrogen  varies,  of  course,  with  the  grade. 


21 


Generally  speaking,  nitrate  of  soda  is  the  most  desirable  form  of 
commercial  nitrogen  to  nse.  In  tests  by  Voorhees1  it  was  found  that 
a number  of  plants  recovered  from  the  soil,  on  an  average,  62.09  per- 
cent of  the  nitrogen  applied  in  nitrate  of  soda,  43.26  percent  of  that 
applied  in  sulfate  of  ammonia,  and  40  percent  of  that  applied  in 
dried  blood.  Several  other  prominent  investigators  report  similar  re- 
sults. These  figures,  besides  favoring  nitrate  of  soda,  show  that  a con- 
siderable part  of  the  nitrogen  applied  in  commercial  forms  is  never 
recovered  by  the  crop. 

Another  advantage  of  nitrate  of  soda  not  possessed  by  other  com- 
mercial forms  of  nitrogen  is  that  it  tends  to  correct  the  acidity  of 
the  soil.  While  its  help  in  this  direction  is  not  great,  it  is  well  to 
know  that  its  influence  is  on  the  right  side. 

Marked  benefit  commonly  follows  the  use  of  nitrate  of  soda  early 
in  the  spring  in  connection  with  very  early  crops.  This  is  due  to  the 
fact  that  plants  can  make  use  of  nitrogen  in  nitrate  form  immedi- 
ately, and  that  there  is  little  nitrate  nitrogen  in  the  soil  at  this  time 
of  the  year.  The  soil  organisms  engaged  in  changing  organic  and 
other  forms  of  nitrogen  to  soluble  or  nitrate  form  are  practically  in- 
active at  the  soil  temperatures  commonly  prevailing  in  early  spring. 
Below  50°  F.  their  action  is  practically  at  a standstill,  but  their  ac- 
tivity increases  with  the  temperature  up  to  about  100°  F.  Thus,  little 
nitrogen  is  becoming  available  during  early  spring,  and,  as  practi- 
cally all  of  the  small  amount  existing  in  the  soil  in  soluble  condition 
the  fall  before  has  been  lost  by  drainage  and  leaching  during  the 
winter,  nitrate  of  soda  will  supply  this  element  in  proper  form  at  a 
time  when  plants  cannot  obtain  a sufficient  amount  of  it  from  other 
sources  for  the  best  growth. 

Nitrate  of  soda  is  often  applied  in  relatively  large  amounts  for 
general  fertility  purposes  before  planting  the  crops,  but  it  is  better 
economy  to  use  this  form  for  top  dressing  to  the  growing  plants.  It 
is  instrumental  in  hastening  the  development  and  in  increasing  the 
size  of  the  specimens  in  certain  crops.  In  New  Jersey2  it  was  found 
that  in  soil  already  very  fertile,  and  to  which  liberal  amounts  of 
complete  commercial  fertilizer  were  applied  in  addition,  nitrate  of 
soda  applied  at  intervals  to  the  growing  crops  caused  very  marked 
increases  in  the  yields  of  cabbage,  celery,  tomatoes,  turnips,  and  pep- 
pers. Experiments  conducted  by  this  station,  at  Urbana,  on  brown 
silt  loam  heavily  manured  each  year  but  receiving  no  other  fertilizer, 
indicate  that  nitrate  of  soda  may  be  used  with  benefit  on  early  cab- 
bage, cauliflower,  radishes,  beets,  turnips,  and  spinach.  Tests  made  in 
several  places  indicate  that  lettuce  is  markedly  improved  by  the  nitrate 
except  when  the  soil  has  received  heavy  applications  of  manure.  Fresh 


1N.  J.  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  221. 

2N.  J.  Exp.  Sta;  Bui.  157. 


22 


horse  manure  contains  organisms  which  decompose  nitrates  and  con- 
vert their  nitrogen  to  gaseous  forms.  It  is  advisable,  therefore,  to 
avoid  its  use  in  large  quantities  immediately  before  planting  when 
nitrate  of  soda  is  to  be  used  for  top-dressing  purposes. 

In  order  to  secure  the  best  results  from  nitrate  of  soda,  it  should 
be  applied  to  the  growing  plants  in  from  two  to  four  top  dressings, 
depending  upon  the  length  of  the  growing  season  of  the  crop  treated. 
The  first  application  should  be  made  when  the  plants  are  well  started, 
and  succeeding  applications  should  be  made  at  intervals  of  about  ten 
days  to  two  weeks.  From  80  to  100  pounds  per  acre  should  be  used 
each  time.  The  nitrate  should  be  ground  or  pounded  into  small  parti- 
cles. To  prevent  “burning”  the  leaves  of  the  plants,  it  is  best  to  apply 
it  in  such  a way  that  it  does  not  come  into  direct  contact  with  the  foli- 
age. There  are  machines  on  the  market  made  especially  for  handling 
this  fertilizer;  they  apply  it  in  drills  and  cover  it  at  one  passage.  A 
very  satisfactory  way  to  use  the  nitrate  on  a small  scale  is  to  scatter 
it  about  the  plants  by  hand.  Some  report  success  from  broadcasting 
the  nitrate  over  the  patch  when  the  foliage  is  completely  dry,  claim- 
ing that  the  particles  bounce  off  the  plants.  Others  state  that  they 
distribute  it  during  a rain  and  that  the  nitrate  washes  off  before  any 
damage  has  resulted.  Where  an  overhead  system  of  irrigation  is  at 
hand,  two  additional  methods  present  themselves.  One  is  to  apply 
the  nitrate  broadcast  and  irrigate  immediately;  the  other  is  to  dis- 
solve it  in  a storage  tank  and  apply  it  directly  thru  the  system.  One 
should  finish  with  clear  water  when  using  the  latter  method.  The 
use  of  the  irrigation  system,  however,  is  not  always  practicable,  since 
it  is  sometimes  not  advisable  to  irrigate  at  the  time  one  wishes  to 
apply  the  fertilizer.  Whatever  the  method  of  application,  nitrate  of 
soda  should  be  worked  into  the  soil  as  soon  as  possible. 

It  is  far  better  to  use  the  nitrate  in  small  amounts  at  intervals, 
as  explained,  than  to  apply  the  full  amount  at  one  time  early  in  the 
season.  Applied  in  the  latter  fashion  there  would  not  only  be  danger 
of  injury  to  the  plants,  but  there  would  likely  be  an  excessive  waste 
of  the  nitrate  as  well,  for  nitrate  of  soda  is  very  soluble  and  much  of 
it  would  be  lost  by  drainage  and  leaching  before  it  could  be  utilized 
by  the  plants.  In  the  case  of  some  crops,  particularly  those  which 
produce  fruit,  it  is  usually  not  advisable  to  continue  the  application 
of  nitrate  of  soda  until  too  near  the  time  of  maturity,  for  it  may  con- 
tinue to  stimulate  vine  growth  at  the  expense  of  the  fruit. 

Dried  blood  is  probably  the  best  form  of  commercial  nitrogen  to 
use  when  it  is  desired  to  make  relatively  heavy  applications  before 
planting  the  crops.  It  is  not  likely  to  be  injurious  to  plants  when 
used  in  this  way,  and  its  nitrogen,  which  exists  in  organic  form,  is 
not  so  subject  to  loss  by  drainage  and  leaching  as  that  in  nitrate  of 
soda.  Again,  thru  the  action  of  the  soil  organisms,  its  nitrogen  is 


23 


changed  to  nitrate  form  gradually  and  can  be  utilized  by  the  growing 
plants  thruout  a longer  period. 

Sulfate  of  ammonia  has  become  low  enough  in  price  for  consid- 
eration as  a fertilizer  only  within  late  years,  and  not  a great  deal  is 
known  about  its  use.  Some  persons  have  employed  it  with  success, 
while  others  make  very  unfavorable  reports.  It  seems  essential  that 
the  soil  contain  plenty  of  lime  for  success  with  this  form  of  nitrogen. 
In  view  of  the  conflicting  information  concerning  its  effect,  it  is  well 
for  gardeners  to  proceed  cautiously  with  its  use,  for  the  present  at 
least. 

Phosphorus 

Applications  of  phosphorus  do  not  usually  prove  of  very  great 
value  until  the  soil  has  been  fairly  well  built  up  in  organic  matter 
and  nitrogen.  Nearly  all  of  our  soils  are  low  in  phosphorus  content ; 
manure  furnishes  this  element  in  relatively  small  proportions;  and. 
since  it  cannot  be  obtained  from  the  air,  as  in  the  case  of  nitrogen,  we 
must  turn  to  other  sources  for  our  supply.  Phosphorus  appears  to  have 
an  intimate  relation  with  life  itself,  for  it  is  found  in  very  considerable 
amounts  in  the  reproductive  cells  of  plants  and  animals.  It  plays  an 
important  part  in  the  development  of  fruits  and  seeds.  The  principal 
commercial  forms  of  this  element,  are  given  in  Table  5. 


Table  5. — Important  Forms  of  Phosphorus 


Pounds  phosphorus 
per  ton 

Cost  per  ton 

Approximate  cost 
per  pound 

Acid  phosphate 

125 

$15.00 

$ .12 

Steamed  bone  meal 

250 

25.00 

.10 

Rock  phosphate 

250 

7.00 

.03 

For  the  quickest  results,  acid  phosphate  is  the  best  form  to  use, 
for  it  supplies  phosphorus  in  more  soluble  condition  than  the  other 
two  forms  mentioned.  However,  it  is  also  the  most  expensive,  and 
it  adds  acidity  to  the  soil.  While  its  use  may  be  more  justifiable  in 
vegetable  growing  than  in  general  farming,  it  should  be  employed 
with  caution.  Steamed  bone  meal  is  a much  safer  form,  and  furnishes 
phosphorus  somewhat  more  cheaply  as  well,  and  in  a form  which 
plants  can  use  almost  as  quickly  as  that  in  acid  phosphate.  Bone 
meal  tends  to  correct  soil  acidity,  but  its  influence  in  this  direction 
cannot  be  great  because  of  the  relatively  small  amount  used.  Besides 
the  phosphorus  it  contains,  steamed  bone  meal  also  carries  about 
twenty  pounds  of  nitrogen  to  the  ton.  As  a source  of  phosphorus,  it 
is  preferable  to  raw  bone  meal. 

The  above  forms  of  phosphorus  are  valuable  for  use  where  im- 
mediate results  are  desired,  but  if  the  gardener  will  provide  for  his 
phosphorus  needs  a year  or  two  in  advance,  he  may  make  use  of  rock 


24 


phosphate,  which  supplies  the  element  far  more  inexpensively  than 
either  acid  phosphate  or  bone  meal.  The  chief  requirement  for  success 
with  this  form  of  phosphorus  is  a large  amount  of  actively  decaying 
organic  matter  in  the  soil.  The  large  amounts  of  decaying  organic 
matter  and  manure  used  by  vegetable  growers,  therefore,  can  be  made 
of  very  great  service  in  changing  the  insoluble  phosphorus  in  rock 
phosphate  to  soluble  forms.  The  beneficial  effects  occurring  two  or 
three  years  after  the  application  of  rock  phosphate,  especially  where 
it  can  be  applied  in  connection  with  large  amounts  of  actively  de- 
caying organic  matter,  are  so  well  established  that  no  detailed  dis- 
cussion nor  data  need  be  presented  on  this  point. 

There  is  evidence  to  indicate  that  some  of  our  vegetables  are  able 
to  utilize  phosphorus  from  rock  phosphate  almost  immediately.  To- 
mato experiments  were  conducted  by  this  station1  in  Union  county,  for 
five  years.  The  data  presented  in  Table  6 show  the  average  annual  re- 
sults secured  from  supplementing  manure  with  rock  phosphate,  as 
compared  with  other  treatments. 


Table  6. — Fertilizer  Experiments  with  Tomatoes:  Union  County,  Illinois 


Treatment : 
acre  basis 

Pounds  of  market- 
able fruit 
per  plant 

Number  of  crates 
per  acre  increase 
over  check 

Net  profit 
per  acre 
over  check 

Check 

Manure,  10  tons 

2.68 

3.16 

58 

$10.79 

Manure  and  545  pounds  bone 

meal 

3.52 

94 

12.69 

Manure  and  545  pounds  rock 

phosphate 

3.72 

122 

33.55 

In  these  experiments  the  tomatoes  were  grown  on  different . land 
each  of  the  five  seasons;  hence  the  gains  made  were  derived  entirely 
from  an  immediate  use  of  the  fertilizer.  The  results  show  that  rock 
phosphate  in  connection  with  manure  caused  a larger  yield  of  fruit 
than  a similar  quantity  of  bone  meal  used  in  the  same  way,  and  it 
gave  a very  much  greater  net  profit  because  of  the  lower  cost  of  the 
phosphorus. 

The  Department  of  Agronomy  of  this  station  reports  that  in  ex- 
periments conducted  with  potatoes  at  Dixon  and  Mt.  Morris,  Illinois, 
during  the  season  of  1913,  there  were  marked  increases  in  yield  where 
rock  phosphate  was  used  in  addition  to  manure  and  lime.  In  these 
cases  the  materials  were  all  applied  in  the  fall  of  1912. 

It  is  very  likely  that  some  other  vegetable  crops  besides  tomatoes 
and  potatoes  can  make  immediate  use  of  the  phosphorus  in  rock  phos- 
phate, but  it  is  probable  that  many  of  them  would  not  be  markedly 
benefited  by  it  the  first  year.  For  the  majority  of  vegetable  crops  it 
would  in  all  probability  be  advisable  to  use  acid  phosphate  or  steamed 


Til.  Agr.  Exp.  Sta.  Bui.  144. 


25 


bone  meal  for  an  immediate  source  of  phosphorus  and  to  apply  at  the 
same  time  the  much  cheaper  rock  phosphate  for  the  needs  two  or 
three  years  hence.  Where  it  is  believed  that  the  phosphorus  content 
of  the  soil  is  low,  and  this  is  usually  the  case,  the  first  application 
should  consist  of  about  one  ton  of  rock  phosphate  per  acre.  If  this 
is  followed  by  applications  of  1000  pounds  per  acre  every  two  years, 
the  phosphorus  needs  of  vegetable  crops  will  be  met  and  the  soil  will 
gradually  grow  richer  in  this  element.  It  is  a very  good  practice  to 
apply  rock  phosphate  in  connection  with  manure  or  crops  turned  un- 
der for  soiling  purposes. 

Potassium 

Potassium  is  abundant  in  all  Illinois  soils  except  in  some  small 
areas  of  peat  and  sand  lands,  tho  practically  all  of  it  exists  in  very 
insoluble  form.  Manure  and  organic  matter  are  the  most  instrumental 
agencies  in  rendering  these  insoluble  forms  soluble,  and,  except  in  the 
peat  and  sand  soils  referred  to,  vegetables  will  ordinarily  obtain 
sufficient  amounts  of  potassium  from  that  existing  in  the  soil  for 
good  growth.  However,  applications  of  potassiums  often  prove  profit- 
able. This  element  is  used  in  considerable  proportions  by  root  crops, 
and,  as  a rule,  may  be  employed  more  profitably  with  them  than  with 
other  crops.  Table  7 shows  the  principal  forms  of  potassium  which 
may  be  used. 


Table  7. — Important  Forms  of  Potassium 


Pounds  potassium 
per  ton 

Cost  per  ton 

Cost  per  pound 

Muriate  of  potash 

850 

$50.00 

$ .06 

Sulfate  of  potash 

850 

55.00 

.065 

Kainit 

200 

13.00 

.065 

Wood  ashes 

100 

7.00 

.07 

Sulfate  of  potash  is  probably  the  most  satisfactory  form  of  po- 
tassium for  general  use.  The  majority  of  investigations  reported 
favor  this  form,  tho  some  of  them  favor  the  muriate  as  strongly.  The 
kind  of  crop  grown  appears  to  make  some  difference;  some  of  them 
succeed  better  with  sulfate  of  potash  while  others  are  able  to  use  the 
muriate  to  better  effect.  The  large  quantity  of  chlorids  carried  by 
the  muriate  is  injurious  to  some  plants,  especially  when  applied  im- 
mediately before  planting.  This  is  also  true  of  kainit.  Another  ob- 
jection to  kainit  is  the  high  percentage  of  foreign  substances,  for 
which  unnecessary  expense  must  be  incurred  in  the  freight  and  hand- 
ling. 

Wood  ashes  are  an  extremely  good  form  of  potassium,  and  they 
also  contain  a large  percentage  of  lime.  It  is  unfortunate  that  their 


26 


supply  is  limited.  If  any  are  produced  at  home,  they  should  be  kept 
under  cover  until  they  can  be  applied  and  immediately  worked  into 
the  soil;  for  when  exposed  in  the  open,  the  potassium  content  is 
quickly  reduced  by  leaching.  Buying  wood  ashes  in  preference  to 
sulfate  or  muriate  of  potash  will  not  pay  unless  the  ashes  can  be 
bought  at  a lower  figure  than  that  named  in  Table  7.  The  amount 
of  potassium  they  contain  varies  from  about  3 to  8 percent,  and  in 
buying  them  due  consideration  should  be  paid  to  this  point.  It  should 
be  mentioned  in  this  connection  that  coal  ashes  have  no  value  as  a 
fertilizer. 

Whether  or  not  it  will  pay  gardeners  in  Illinois  to  use  commer- 
cial forms  of  potassium  must  be  determined  largely  by  local  condi- 
tions. Certainly  this  element  will  not  give  the  increases  in  this  state 
(except  in  the  peat  and  sand  soils  mentioned,  where  it  commonly 
gives  large  gains)  that  it  gives  in  some  other  sections  of  the  country, 
and  it  is  no  doubt  best  for  gardeners  to  test  it  on  a small  scale  before 
investing  heavily  in  it.  If  applications  seem  profitable,  an  amount 
of  fertilizer  supplying  about  100  pounds  of  potassium  per  acre  an- 
nually will  suffice  under  ordinary  circumstances.  Potassium  sulfate 
or  wood  ashes  should  be  applied  in  the  spring  after  plowing,  and 
harrowed  into  the  soil  thoroly  before  planting  the  crop.  If  muriate 
of  potash  or  kainit  is  used,  it  will  be  better,  as  a rule,  to  apply  it  the 
preceding  fall. 

Limestone 

Besides  having  a sufficient  stock  of  the  limiting  elements  and  or- 
ganic matter  in  the  soil,  it  is  necessary,  for  the  best  growth  of  nearly 
all  vegetables,  that  the  soil  be  free  from  acid.  This  condition  is  best 
imparted  by  the  application  of  ground  limestone,  which  costs  from 
$1  to  $1.50  per  ton  delivered  in  almost  any  part  of  Illinois.  The 
presence  of  lime  in  the  soil  is  directly  beneficial  to  most  vegetables; 
it  is  necessary  for  the  welfare  of  soil  organisms  engaged  in  changing 
tfther  forms  of  nitrogen  to  nitrate  form;  and  it  is  essential  for  the 
best  results  with  legumes. 

Practically  all  vegetables  grow  best  in  a limed  soil.  Potatoes, 
sweet  potatoes,  sweet  corn,  and  turnips  appear  capable  of  growing 
fairly  well  in  soils  containing  some  acid,  tho  they  are  usually  bene- 
fited by  applications  of  limestone  to  a greater  or  less  extent.  Carrots 
seem  to  grow  equally  well  in  limed  or  acid  soils.  Watermelons  are 
injured  by  liming. 

It  should  be  mentioned  in  this  connection  that  potato  scab  is  fa- 
vored in  its  development  by  liming.  This  is  because  the  disease  flour- 
ishes best  in  an  alkaline  condition  of  the  soil,  while  an  acid  soil  checks 
its  development.  In  contrast  to  this,  the  club  root  of  cabbage,  a 
serious  disease  in  some  places,  is  checked  by  lime ; in  fact,  the  most  sat- 
isfactory method  of  treatment  known  for  it  is  the  application  of  lime. 


27 


As  a general  proposition,  the  application  of  limestone  in  vege- 
table growing  is  a profitable  practice,  unless,  of  course,  the  gardener 
specializes  on  such  crops  as  carrots  or  watermelons.  If  the  soil  has 
received  no  lime  before,  about  t,wo  tons  per  acre  should  be  applied 
the  first  time ; after  that  one  ton  every  two  or  three  years  will  usually 
suffice,  except  in  some  of  the  strongly  acid  soils  in  the  southern  part 
of  the  state. 

There  are  a number  of  forms  of  lime,  but  the  most  satisfactory 
for  general  use  is  ground  natural  limestone.  Besides  being  one  of 
the  safest  forms,  it  is  one  of  the  lowest  in  price.  Air-slaked  lime 
may  often  be  secured,  especially  near  lime  kilns,  for  a lower  figure 
than  the  ground  limestone.  This  is  also  a satisfactory  form.  Un- 
slaked or  lump  lime  is  undesirable,  being  very  destructive  to  the  or- 
ganic matter  of  the  soil. 

Drainage  and  Crop  Rotation 

Good  drainage  and  proper  crop  rotation  are  essential  factors  in 
the  production  of  any  crop,  however  well  the  land  may  be  fertilized. 
If  the  land  is  not  naturally  well  drained,  it  should  be  tile  drained. 
Even  on  rolling  land,  tile  drainage  often  proves  highly  beneficial.  An 
adequate  system  of  crop  rotation  is  as  necessary  in  vegetable  growing 
as  in  general  farming.  Continuous  planting  to  the  same  crop,  or  to 
the  same  class  of  crops,  is  not  only  unwise  practice  from  the  fertility 
standpoint,  but  it  allows  serious  diseases  and  insects  to  become  estab- 
lished in  the  soil  as  well.  Gardeners  should  so  arrange  their  planting 
that  the  same  crop  or  class  of  crops  does  not  occupy  a given  area  more 
than  once  in  three  or  four  years. 

SUMMARY 

The  fertility  problem  in  vegetable  growing  is  one  of  the  most 
important  of  the  many  difficulties  confronting  the  gardener.  The 
general  principles  underlying  the  fertilizing  of  farm  and  vegetable 
crops  are  the  same,  tho  on  account  of  the  wide  differences  in  the  two 
branches  of  agriculture,  there  are  marked  differences  with  respect  to 
the  specific  manner  and  degree  of  their  application. 

Vegetable  crops  remove  large  amounts  of  fertility  from  the  soil, 
and  comparatively  large  losses  occur  also  thru  drainage  and  leaching 
and  by  oxidation  of  the  nitrogen  and  organic  matter.  These  latter 
losses  may  be  checked  to  a certain  extent  by  careful  methods,  but  even 
with  the  best  attention  there  will  still  be  large  losses.  Hence,  the 
maintenance  of  the  highly  fertile  condition  necessary  for  successful 
vegetable  production  is  not  a simple  matter. 

The  organic  matter  content  of  the  soil  can  be  maintained  by 
plowing  under  manure,  crop  refuse,  and  cover  crops.  Nitrogen  can 


28 


be  furnished  by  manure,  by  leguminous  crops,  and  by  the  various 
commercial  forms  of  this  element.  Manure  is  without  a doubt  the 
best  general  source  of  fertility  for  the  vegetable  grower,  tho  it  is 
somewhat  low  in  content  of  the  mineral  elements.  Large  losses  in 
manure  occur  thru  improper  handling,  and  its  proper  treatment  un- 
der the  circumstances  met  with  in  practical  vegetable  gardening  is  a 
rather  difficult  problem,  and  one  in  which  many  serious  mistakes  are 
made. 

It  is  practicable  for  gardeners  to  utilize  cover  crops  as  a source 
of  organic  matter.  If  legumes,  such  as  cowpeas,  soybeans,  and  hairy 
vetch,  are  grown,  they  will  serve  as  sources  of  nitrogen  also. 

Commercial  forms  of  nitrogen,  even  tho  expensive,  can  often  be 
used  with  profit  by  the  vegetable  grower.  Nitrate  of  soda  appears  to 
be  the  most  satisfactory  form  when  used  in  the  right  way.  On  ac- 
count of  its  soluble  condition  and  the  fact  that  plants  can  use  it 
directly,  it  is  particularly  helpful  in  forcing  the  growth  of  early 
spring  crops.  However,  it  must  be  applied  in  proper  amounts,  at 
proper  times,  and  by  proper  methods,  or  serious  harm  to  the  plants 
will  almost  certainly  result. 

Since  the  amount  of  phosphorus  contained  in  most  soils  is  small, 
and  since  manure  is  low  in  that  element,  applications  of  some  commer- 
cial form  usually  prove  profitable.  For  immediate  results,  acid  phos- 
phate and  steamed  bone  meal  are  the  best  forms  to  use,  but  if  the 
gardener  will  provide  for  his  needs  two  or  three  years  in  advance, 
he  can  employ  the  very  much  cheaper  raw  rock  phosphate.  The  phos- 
phorus in  this  form  is  insoluble,  but  the  large  amounts  of  manure, 
crop  refuse,  and  cover  crops  ordinarily  plowed  under  in  vegetable 
growing  will  be  instrumental  in  changing  it  to  soluble  forms.  There 
are  even  some  experiments  on  record  which  indicate  that  certain  vege- 
table crops  give  marked  increases  in  yields  the  season  immediately 
following  its  application. 

Potassium  is  abundant  in  nearly  all  Illinois  soils,  but  applications 
of  it  sometimes  prove  profitable.  Sulfate  of  potash  appears  to  be  the 
most  satisfactory  form  for  general  use,  tho  muriate  of  potash  seems 
to  give  equally  good  results  with  some  crops.  Unleached  wood  ashes 
are  a most  satisfactory  form  of  potassium,  but  unfortunately  the  sup- 
ply is  limited. 

Lime  benefits  practically  all  vegetable  crops  and  should  be  used 
in  liberal  amounts  by  gardeners.  Ground  limestone  is  the  cheapest 
form  and  one  of  the  most  satisfactory  as  well. 

Finally,  the  land  should  be  well  drained,  either  naturally  or  arti- 
ficially, and  an  adequate  system  of  crop  rotation  should  be  practiced. 

The  factors  mentioned  each  bear  an  important  relation  to  the 
welfare  of  the  plant.  It  is  only  after  all  of  them  have  received  proper 
attention  that  maximum  crops  of  high-quality  vegetables  can  be  pro- 
duced. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


CIRCULAR  No.  183 


A Bibliography  of  Recent  Literature  Concerning 
Plant-Disease  Prevention 

By  Charles  C.  Rees  and  Wallace  Macfarlane 
And 


A Bibliography  of  Non-Parasitic  Diseases 
of  Plants 

By  Cyrus  W.  Lantz 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  MAY,  1915 


A Bibliography  of 
Recent  Literature  Concerning 
Plant-Disease  Prevention 


BY 

Charles  C.  Rees  and  Wallace  Macfarlane 


Preface 


In  assembling  this  bibliography,  an  attempt  has  been  made  to  include  refer- 
ences to  every  article  relating  to  plant  diseases  in  which  control  measures  are 
given,  the  abstract  of  which  has  appeared  in  the  Experiment  Station  Record 
during  the  years  1909-14  inclusive. 

The  classification  of  the  citations,  about  a thousand  in  number,  has  been 
made  under  headings  of  the  various  hosts  arranged  in  alphabetical  order.  Under 
each  host  the  references  have  been  arranged  alphabetically  according  to  the 
common  name  of  the  disease  when  given.  No  attempt  has  been  made  to  supply 
these  names,  and  where  they  were  missing  the  references  are  listed  under  the 
generic  name  of  the  fungus ; for  instance,  an  article  discussing  Pleospora 
graminea,  which  gave  no  common  name  to  the  disease,  is  listed  under  Pleospora. 
In  every  case  where  the  generic  name  of  the  fungus  was  given,  or  where  it 
could  be  supplied  with  reasonable  certainty,  it  is  included  in  parentheses  after 
the  common  name  of  the  disease.  In  many  instances  authors  in  discussing 
a disease  caused  by  a certain  fungus  gave  to  the  disease  different  common 
names;  for  instance,  the  disease  of  Irish  potato  caused  by  the  fungus  Synchy- 
trium  endobiotica  was  found  referred  to  by  different  authors  as  wart, 
canker,  black  canker,  and  black  scab.  In  such  cases  it  was  necessary-  to  select 
the  name  most  generally  accepted  and  list  the  various  references  thereunder. 
Under  each  disease  the  citations  have  been  placed  in  alphabetical  order  according 
to  the  name  of  the  author. 

In  order  to  include  as  many  pertinent  references  as  possible,  a general  host 
classification  under  the  headings  of  citrus  fruits,  field  crops,  et  cetera,  has 
also  been  employed.  In  addition  to  this  there  appears  a set  of  references 
pertaining  to  fungicides. 

Each  article  includes  reference  to  the  original  article  and  to  the  Experiment 
Station  Record  in  which  the  article  was  found  abstracted.  The  latter  reference, 
in  which  the  first  number  indicates  the  volume  and  the  second  the  page,  is 
placed  in  parentheses. 


A BIBLIOGRAPHY  OF  RECENT  LITERATURE 
CONCERNING  PLANT-DISEASE 
PREVENTION 


By  CHARLES  C.  REES,  Assistant  in  Floricultural  Pathology  Re- 
search, and  WALLACE  MACFARLANE,  Fellow  in  Agronomy1 


ACACIA 

Root  Disease  ( Armillaria-F omes ) 

Petch,  T. 

Circs,  and  Agr.  Jour.  Roy.  Bot.  Gard.,  Ceylon,  5 (1910),  10,  89.  (25,  47) 

Uproot  and  burn  the  diseased  trees. 

ALFALFA 

Diseases,  General 

Stewart,  F.  C.,  French,  G.  T.,  and  Wilson,  J.  K. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  305.  (20,  846) 

Blight  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Sackett,  W.  G. 

Colo.  Sta.  Bui.  158.  (23,  546)  Introduce  resistant  varieties  that  will  stand 

late  spring  frosts.  Clip  off  frosted  alfalfa  as  soon  as  danger  of  frost  is  passed, 
which  will  afford  an  early  growth  of  a new  cutting. 

Club  Root  ( Urophlyctis ) 

Korff,  G. 

Prakt.  Bl.  Pflanzenbau  u.  Schutz,  n.  ser.,  7 (1909),  21,  157.  (23,  248) 
Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1907,  16,  267.  (20,  845) 

Rust  ( Uromyces ) 

Pam mel,  L.  H.,  and  King,  C.  M. 

Ia.  Sta.  Bui.  131.  (27,  445) 

Stem  Rot  ( Rhizoctonia ) 

Laurer,  G. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  30  (1910),  46,  439.  (23,  741)  Liquid  manure,  quick- 

lime, and  creosol  recommended. 

1Working  under  the  direction  of  Dr.  F.  L.  Stevens,  Professor  of  Plant  Pathology, 
University  of  Illinois. 


(3) 


4 


ALMOND 


Diseases,  General 


Arnaud,  G. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  30  (1909),  15,  451. 


(21,  245) 


APPLE 

Diseases,  General 

Brooks,  C. 

N.  H.  Sta.  Bui.  144.  (22,  747) 

McCormack,  E.  F. 

Ann.  Rpt.  State  Ent.  Ind.,  3 (1909-10),  128.  (25,  45) 

Morse,  W.  J.,  and  Lewis,  C.  E. 

Me.  Sta.  Bui.  185.  (24,  745) 

Prillieux,  E. 

Bui.  Soc.  Nat.  Agr.  France,  68  (1908),  5,  286.  (20,  453) 

Reed,  H.  S.,  Cooley,  J.  S.,  and  Rogers,  J.  T. 

Va.  Sta.  Bui.  195.  (27,  152) 

Stevens,  F.  L. 

N.  C.  Sta.  Bui.  206.  (23,  453) 

Stewart,  F.  C. 

West  N.  Y.  Hort.  Soc.  Proc.,  56  (1911),  61.  (26,  55)  Keep  trees  in  vigor- 

ous condition  and  spray  regularly  and  thoroly. 

Swingle,  D.  B. 

Mont.  Sta.  Circ.  37.  (31,  644) 

Anthracnose  ( Glooosporium ) 

Cordley,  A.  B. 

Better  Fruit,  4 (1909),  4,  13.  (22,  349)  Spray  with  Bordeaux  soon  after 

fruit  is  gathered.  Spray  again  after  the  leaves  have  fallen  with  Bordeaux  or 
lime  sulfur. 

Jackson,  H.  S. 

Ore.  Sta.  Bien.  Crop  Pest  and  Hort.  Rpt.  1911-12,  178.  (29,  153)  Con- 

trol measures  given  in  Exp.  Sta.  Rec.,  29,  249. 


Ore.  Sta.  Circ.  17.  (27,  249)  Apply  4-4-50  Bordeaux  in  fall  before  rains, 

and  6-6-50  Bordeaux  as  soon  as  fruit  is  picked.  Give  an  additional  spraying 
earlier  in  the  season  if  disease  is  bad.  Cut  out  cankers. 

Lawrence,  W.  H. 

Bien.  Rpt.  Bd.  Hort.  Ore.,  12  (1911-12),  93.  (31,  53)  Repeated  spraying 

recommended.  Spray  in  autumn  following  maturity  of  fruit.  Bordeaux-petro- 
leum  emulsion  gives  promise. 

Lownsdale,  M.  O. 

Better  Fruit,  5 (1910),  1,  44.  (23,  745)  To  prevent  new  infection  during 

the  succeeding  year,  spray  in  September  with  a solution  of  1 gallon  of  lime 
sulfur  in  18  gallons  of  water. 


Bitter  Rot  ( Glomerella ) 


Laubert,  R. 

Deut.  Obstbau  Ztg.,  1910,  14,  175.  (23,  548) 

Lounsbury,  C.  P. 

Agr.  Jour.  Cape  Good  Hope,  37  (1910),  4,  355.  (24,  348) 

Wolf,  F.  A. 

Proc.  Ala.  State  Hort.  Soc.,  9 (1912),  69.  (27,  546) 

Blister  Canker  (Nmnrnularia) 

Gloyer,  W.  O. 

Ohio  (Wooster)  Sta.  Circ.  125.  (27,  749)  Remove  and  destroy  all  diseased 

parts.  Cover  wounds  after  pruning  with  asphaltum  or  grafting  wax. 

Pam mel,  L.  H.,  and  King,  C.  M. 

Ia.  Sta.  Bui.  131.  (27,  445) 

Blotch  ( Phyllosticta ) 

Lewis,  D.  E. 

Kans.  Sta.  Bui.  196.  (31,  53)  3-4-50  Bordeaux  recommended.  Lime 

sulfur  found  to  be  less  effective  than  Bordeaux  except  in  wet  weather,  when 
Bordeaux  has  a tendency  to  russet  the  fruit. 

Scott,  W.  M.,  and  Rorer,  J.  B. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  144.  (20,  1044)  Apply  5-5-50 
Bordeaux  three  weeks  after  petals  have  fallen.  Follow  with  three  applications 
at  intervals  of  two  weeks. 

Canker  ( SpJurropsis ) 

Brooks,  C.,  and  DeMeritt,  M. 

Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  5,  181.  (28,  548)  Plow  under  diseased  leaves.  Apply 

Bordeaux  and  lime  sulfur. 

Ducloux,  A. 

Rev.  Hort.  (Paris),  82  (1910),  21,  506;  22,  520.  (24,  450) 

Evans,  I.  B.  P. 

Transvaal  Agr.  Jour.,  7 (1908),  25,  62.  (20,  848)  Destroy  all  decayed 

fruit,  prune  out  cankers,  and  spray  with  Bordeaux. 

Hesler,  L.  R. 

Proc.  Ind.  Acad.  Sci.,  1911,  325.  (29,  752)  Prune  off  diseased  limbs  below 

point  of  attack.  Select  for  planting  nonsusceptible  varieties. 

McCready,  S.  B. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Ontario  Agr.  Col.  and  Expt.  Farm,  35  (1909),  41.  (23,  351) 

Good  cultivation,  thoro  spraying,  careful  cutting  out  of  all  cankers,  and  destruc- 
tion of  diseased  rubbish  recommended. 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  47  (1910),  1217,  258.  (23,  549) 

Wolf,  F.  A. 

Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  6,  288.  (30,  650)  Spray  early  in  season  with  Bor- 

deaux. 


6 


(Anon.) 

Bd.  Agr.  and  Fisheries  (London)  Leaflet  281  (1913).  (30,  650)  Re- 

move dead  branches  and  leaves  and  spray  with  half-strength  Bordeaux  a week 
after  petals  fall,  and  again  one  month  later. 

Crown  Gall  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Hedgcock,  G.  G. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  186.  (24,  249)  To  keep  nursery 

free  from  disease,  leave  all  diseased  trees  in  the  field  at  the  time  of  digging  and 
burn  them  as  soon  as  dry.  Scions  from  healthy  trees  and  stocks  from  seed  of 
sound  trees  only  should  be  used.  Avoid  wou.iding  of  trees  during  cultivation. 

Fire  Blight  ( Bacillus ) 

Hall,  J.  G. 

Wash.  Sta.  Popular  Bui.  56.  (29,  848)  Remove  and  burn  all  diseased 

parts. 

Jackson,  H.  S. 

Ore.  Sta.  Circ.  7.  (23,  454) 

Lawrence,  W.  H. 

Bien.  Rpt.  Bd.  Hort.  Ore,  12  (1911-12),  107.  (31,  53) 

Pickett,  B.  S. 

111.  Sta.  Circ.  172.  (31,  644)  Remove  infected  trees,  which  carry  disease 

over  winter. 

Swingle,  D.  B. 

Mont.  Sta.  Circ.  2.  (23,  352) 

(Anon.) 

Queensland  Agr.  Jour,  26  (1911),  5,  266.  (25,  455)  Spray  tr?es  several 

times  during  winter  with  red  oil.  Follow  after  foliage  appears  with  a weak 
kerosene  oil  emulsion,  applied  with  a brush  to  cankers  on  trunk. 

Fruit  Spot  ( Cylindrosporium ) 

Brooks,  C. 

N.  H.  Sta.  Sci.  Contrib.  2,  423.  (20,  847)  To  prevent  disease,  apply  Bor- 

deaux in  June  or  July. 

Fruit  Spot  ( Phoma ) 

Brooks,  C. 

N.  H.  Sta.  Bui.  157.  (27,  849) 

Lewis,  C.  E. 

Me.  Sta.  Bui.  170.  (22,  547) 

Leaf  Spot  ( Cladosporium ) 

Chittenden,  F.  J. 

Jour.  Roy.  Hort.  Soc.  (London).  33  (1908),  2,  500.  (20,  547)  To  check 

germination  of  fungus  spores,  apply  dilute  Bordeaux. 

Mildew,  Powdery  (Podosphcura) 

Ballard,  W.  S,  and  Volck,  W.  H. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  120,  26.  (31,  748)  Spray  foliage  with  iron-sulfid 

solution  or  with  precipitated  sulfur.  Prune  in  winter. 

Boll,  J. 

Deut.  Obstbau  Ztg,  1912,  3,  47.  (26  750)  Lime  sulfur,  1-20,  recommended. 


7 


Eriksson,  J. 

Prakt.  Bl.  Pflanzenbau  u.  Schutz,  n.  ser.,  7 (1909),  6,  73;  7,  96.  (22,  349) 

Burn  all  old  leaves  and  affected  shoots.  Spray  with  1-percent  copper-sulfate 
solution.  One-percent  potassium-sulfid  solution  also  recommended.  Mix  lime 
in  soil  around  trees. 

Lustner,  G. 

Ber.  K.  Lehranst.  Wein,  Obst  u.  Gartenbau  Geisenheim,  1909,  120.  (24, 

156)  Destroy  diseased  branches  on  which  perithecia  are  found.  Sulfur  and 
lime-sulfur  spray  recommended. 

Volck,  W.  H. 

Better  Fruit,  5 (1911),  8,  39;  9,  60.  (25,  145)  Iron  sulfid  recommended  as 

a summer  spray. 

Rust  (Gymno sporangium) 

Bartholomew,  E.  T. 

Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  6,  253.  (28,  748)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Fulton,  H.  R. 

N.  C.  Sta.  Rpt.  1912,  62.  (29,  49)  For  prevention,  spray:  (1)  just  after 
leaves  emerge  from  bud,  (2)  just  before  blossoms  open,  (3)  just  after  petals 
fall,  and  (4)  ten  days  later. 

Giddings,  N.  J. 

W.  Va.  Crop  Pest  Com.  Bui.  2,  7.  (30,  651)  Destroy  all  cedars  within  a 

mile  of  apple  orchard. 

and  Neal,  D.  C. 

Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  6,  258.  (28,  748)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Heald,  F.  D. 

Nebr.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908,  103.  (22,  47) 

Hein,  W.  H. 

Insect  Pest  and  Plant  Disease  Bur.  Nebr.,  Div.  Bot.  Circ.  1.  (21,  644) 

Remove  cedar  trees  and  plant  resistant  varieties  of  apple. 

Reed,  H.  S.,  Cooley,  J.  S.,  and  Crabill,  C.  H. 

Va.  Sta.  Bui.  203.  (30,  450)  Coppejr  lime  sulfur  and  lime  sulfur  both 

found  to  be  effective. 

Wolf,  F.  A. 

Proc.  Ala.  State  Hort.  Soc.,  9 (1912),  69.  (27,  546) 

Scab  ( Venturia ) 

Beattie,  R.  K. 

West.  Fruit-Grower,  20  (1909),  1,  6.  (21,  244)  Lime  sulfur  superior  to 

Bordeaux.  Solution  of  1 pound  of  sulfur,  y2  pound  of  lime,  and  5 gallons  of 
water  recommended. 


Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  1,  42.  (31,  346)  Spray  thoroly  with  lime  sulfur 

under  heavy  pressure,  twice  during  the  season. 

Blodgett,  F.  M. 

Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  1,  44.  (31,  449)  Dust  with  sulfur  and  treat  host  with 

sulfur  suspension  in  water. 


8 


BRETSCHN  EIDER,  A. 

Wiener  Landw.  Ztg.,  59  (1909),  100,  980.  (22,  650) 

Darrow,  W.  H. 

Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  5,  265.  (30,  542)  The  disease  may  be  carried  over 
on  young  shoots,  and  the  application  of  some  strong  fungicide  to  these  before 
the  opening  of  the  leaf  buds  will  reduce  infection  from  this  source. 

Fischer,  F. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  19  (1909),  7,  432;  abs.  in  Riv.  Patol.  Veg.,  4 
(1910),  7,  97.  (23,  151)  No  immune' varieties.  Apply  Bordeaux  in  spring 

before  leaves  appear. 

McCready,  S.  B. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Ontario  Agr.  Col.  and  Expt.  Farm,  36  (1910),  42.  (25,  549) 

Apply  home-boiled  lime  sulfur  just  before  leaves  open;  give  second  application 
of  commercial  lime  sulfur  at  the  opening  of  blossom  buds;  and  spray  for  the 
third  time  with  1-30  commercial  lime  sulfur  when  blossoms  fall. 

Mally,  C.  W. 

Agr.  Jour.  Cape  Good  Hope,  35  (1909),  2,  202.  (22,  50)  One  application  of 

6-4-50  Bordeaux  gave  60  percent  sound  fruit ; two  applications  gave  90  per- 
cent sound  fruit ; and  three  applications  rendered  fruit  practically  free  from 
disease. 

Morris,  H.  E. 

Mont.  Sta.  Bui.  96.  (31,  645)  Plant  resistant  varieties  and  spray  thoroly. 

Nicholls,  H.  M. 

Agr.  Gaz.  Tasmania,  21  (1913),  10,  387.  (30,  541)  Plow  fallen  leaves 

under  early,  harrow  surface,  and  leave  undisturbed  until  after  November  15. 
Spray  trees  early  in  October  with  Bordeaux,  Burgundy,  or  lime-sulfur  mixture, 
adding  one  pound  of  wheat  flour  to  each  gallon  of  solution  in  order  to  pro- 
mote spreading  and  adhesion. 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  15  (1908),  3,  182.  (20,  950)  Wash  trees  in 

winter  with  strong  solution  of  copper  sulfate.  Apply  4-4-50  Bordeaux  in 
spring. 


Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1907,  16,  267.  (20,  845) 


Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1909,  18,  267.  (25,  247)  Judicious  spray- 

ing with  4-100  copper-sulfate  solution  in  February  followed  by  two  or  three 
sprayings  with  Bordeaux  controls  the  disease. 


Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1911,  20,.  408.  (28,  448)  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended over  lime  sulfur. 

Schander,  R. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  36  (1909),  7,  63.  (21,  54)  Bordeaux  (2  percent) 

more  efficient  than  carbolineum  {]/2  percent). 

Voges,  E. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  20  (1910),  7,  385;  rev.  in  Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  48 
(1910),  1250,  432.  (24,  450)  Apply  Bordeaux  in  spring. 


9 


Wallace,  E. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bill.  335.  (30,  848)  Lime  sulfur  recommended. 


Rpt.  Niagara  Sprayer  Co.  Fellowship,  2 (1909),  10.  (22,  650)  Lime  sul- 

fur, 1-30,  as  efficient  as  3-4-50  Bordeaux  and  does  not  cause  injury  to  leaves 
or  fruit. 

(Anon.) 

Ore.  Agr.  Col.  Bui.  48,  1 ser.  (25,  247)  Spray  with  1-15  lime  sulfur  when 
blossoms  show  pink. 


ARROWROOT 

Diseases,  General 

(Anon.) 

Agr.  News  (Barbados),  10  (1911),  237,  174.  (25,  654)  Destroy  diseased 

plants.  Aerate  soil  thoroly.  Rotate  with  cotton. 

ASPARAGUS 

Foot  Rot  ( Zopfia ) 

Farneti,  R. 

Riv.  Patol.  Veg.,  4 (1910),  18,  273.  (25,  44)  Burn  diseased  plants.  Dis- 

infect beds  with  carbon  disulfid. 


ASTER 

Milowia 

Massee,  G. 

Roy.  Bot.  Gard.  Kew,  Bui.  Misc.  Inform.,  1912,  1,  44.  (26,  551)  Sterilize 

seed  bed  with  formalin  or  steam.  Apply  coal  ashes. 


AZALEA 


Diseases,  General 

Hartmann,  J. 

Gartenwelt,  14  (1910),  19,  217.  (24,  252)  Destroy  diseased  limbs.  Sprav 

with  copper  sulfate,  IJ2  percent. 

Gall  ( Exobasidium ) 


Laubert,  L. 

Handelsbl.  Deut.  Gartenbau,  24  (1909),  466;  abs.  in  Bot.  Ztg.,  2 Abt.,  67 
(1909),  20-21,  285.  (22,  351)  Use  Bordeaux  or  sulfur.  Remove  and  destroy 

diseased  parts. 


BANANA 

Banana  Disease  (Unnamed) 

Levy,  H.  Q. 

Jour.  Jamaica  Agr.  Soc.,  14  (1910),  7,  241.  (23,  747) 

Blight 

McKenney,  R.  E.  B. 

Abs.  in  Science,  n.  ser.,  31  (1910),  802,  750.  (23,  455) 


IO 


Smut  ( Ustilagenoidella ) 


Essed,  E. 

Ann.  Bot.  (London),  25  (1911),  98,  363,  (25,  350) 
mended. 


Copper  sulfate  recom- 


BARLEY 

Late  Blight  ( Helminthosporium ) 

Bakke,  A.  L. 

Proc.  Ia.  Acad.  Sci.,  19  (1912),  93.  (29,  750)  Keep  soil  in  sanitary  con- 

dition. Treat  seed  with  formalin. 

Edinburgh  and  East  of  Scotland  College  of  Agriculture 

Rpt.  30  (1913),  15.  (31,  147)  Formalin  and  copper  sulfate  treatment  of 

seeds  greatly  reduces  late  blight. 

Johnson,  A.  G. 

Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  1,  46.  (31,  446)  Soak  seed  five  hours  in  cold  water, 

and  then  for  fifteen  minutes  in  water  at  52°  C. 

Pleospora 

Mortensen,  M.  L. 

Tidsskr.  Landbr.  Planteavl,  16  (1909),  1,  110.  (22,  246)  Dip  seed  20 

times  in  five  minutes  in  water  at  57°  C. 

Smut  ( Ustilago ) 

Appel,  O. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  29  (1909),  55,  521.  (22,  48)  Hot-water  treatment 

recommended. 

— and  Riehm,  E. 

Arb.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  8 (1911),  3,  343.  (26,  546)  Soak  seed 
in  water  at  50°  C.  for  seven  to  ten  minutes,  then  expose  to  air  at  50°  C.  for 
five  minutes  only. 

Broili,  J. 

Naturw.  Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Landw.,  8 (1910),  7,  335.  (23,  741) 


Naturw.  Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Landw.,  9 (1911),  1,  53.  (24,  647) 

Heald,  F.  D. 

Nebr.  Sta.  Rpt.  1907,  45.  (20,  450)  Formalin,  1-25,  hot  water,  and  copper 

sulfate  recommended. 

Gisevius,  P.,  and  Bohmer 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  30  (1910),  77,  725.  (24,  346)  Drying  apparatus  to  be 

used  in  hot-air  method  described. 

Kuhle,  L. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  28  (1908),  67,  578.  (20,  947)  Soak  seed  in  water  at 

65°  C.  for  twelve  minutes. 

Sperling,  J. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  30  (1910),  9,  66.  (23,  46)  Soak  seed  in  water  at  25°  C. 

for  four  hours,  and  then  expose  to  air  at  50°  C.  for  thirty  minutes. 

Tepin,  H. 

Sveriges  Utsadesfor.  Tidskr..  19  (1909),  2,  119.  (22,  246)  Hot-water 

treatment  recommended. 


II 


BEAN 

Diseases,  General 

Whetzel,  H.  H. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  255.  (20,  546)  Select  clean  seed. 

Anthracnose  ( Collet otrichum ) 

Edgerton,  C.  W. 

La.  Sta.  Bui.  116.  (21,  549)  Select  clean  seed. 

Muncie,  J.  H. 

Mich.  Sta.  Special  Bui.  68.  (31,  542) 

Querner,  H. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Kammer  Braunschweig,  77  (1908),  31,  367.  (20,  648) 

Good  drainage,  clean  seed,  and  application  of  ammoniacal  copper  carbonate  as 
a preventative,  recommended. 
von  Diakonoff,  H. 

Geisenh.  Mitt.  Obst  u.  Gartenbau,  24  (1909),  4,  57.  (22,  546) 

Wilcox,  E.  M.,  and  Temple,  C.  E. 

Insect  Pest  and  Plant  Disease  Bur.  Nebr.,  Div.  Bot.  Circ.  6.  (21,  642) 

Remove  and  burn  diseased  plants. 

Blight  ( Alternaria ) 

Ferraris,  T. 

Riv.  Patol.  Veg.,  3 (1909),  16,  241.  (20,  1138)  Bordeaux  or  soda  Bordeaux 

recommended. 

Blight  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Edgerton,  C.  W.,  and  Moreland,  C.  C. 

La.  Sta.  Bui.  139.  (28,  846)  Select  clean  seed  and  treat  with  corrosive 

sublimate  before  planting. 

Muncie,  J.  H. 

Mich.  Sta.  Special  Bui.  68.  (31,  542) 

Mildew,  Downy  ( Plasmopara ) 

Jarvis,  C.  D. 

Conn.  Storrs  Sta.  Rpt.  1908-09,  31.  (22,  743)  2-2-50  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 

Rust  ( Uromyces ) 

Fuschini,  C. 

Revista  (Conegliano),  4 ser.,  17  (1911),  19,  443;  abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr. 
(Rome),  Bui.  Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant  Diseases,  2 (1911),  11-12,  2600.  (27,  47) 
Apply  iron  sulfate  to  soil. 

Gassner,  G. 

Rev.  Secc.  Agron.  Univ.  Montevideo,  1908,  4,  125.  (22,  746) 

BEET 

Diseases,  General 

Busse,  W.,  and  Ulrich,  P. 

Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  1909,  8,  21.  (23,  348) 


SCHANDER,  R. 

Deut.  Zucherindus.,  35  (1910),  5,  110;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt.,  27 
(1910),  10,  307.  (23,  745) 

Stift,  A. 

Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt.,  23  (1909),  6,  .173.  (22,  347) 

Storm er,  K. 

Bl.  Zuckerrubenbau,  15  (1908),  16,  247;  17,  264;  18,  279.  (21,  52) 

WOHANKA  & Co. 

Ann.  Amer.  Rpt.  Sugar  Beet  Seed  Breeding  Sta.,  3 (1910),  30.  (26,  648) 

Club  Root  ( Urophlyctis ) 

Griffon'  and  Maublanc 

Bui.  Trimest.  Soc.  Mycol.  France,  25  (1909),  2,  98.  (21,  642) 

Damping-off 

Stift,  A. 

Osterr.  Ungar.  Ztschr.  Zuckerindus.  u.  Landw.,  40  (1911),  2,  211.  (25,  349) 

Stormer,  K.,  and  Eichinger,  A. 

Fiihling’s  Landw.  Ztg.,  59  (1910),  12,  393;  abs.  in  Bl.  Zuckerrubenbau,  17 
(1910),  14,  229;  15,  245.  (24,  248)  Lime,  phosphoric  acid,  and  either  table 

salt  or  potash  recommended. 

Heart  Rot  ( Phoma ) 

Busse,  W.,  and  Ulrich,  P. 

Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  1909,  8,  21.  (23,  348)  When  tested, 

ammonium  salts  showed  no  advantage  over  saltpeter. 

Griffon  and  Maublanc 

Bui.  Trimest.  Soc.  Mycol.  France,  25  (1909),  2,  98.  (21,  642) 

Hegyi,  D. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  21  (1911),  5,  269.  (26,  548)  Dry  the  seed,  fertilize 

plants,  and  cultivate  properly. 

Kappeli,  J.,  and  Morgenthaler,  O. 

Landw.  Jahrb.  Schweiz,  27  (1913),  8,  432.  (31,  344)  Employ  least  suscep- 

tible varieties.  Plant  other  and  non-susceptible  crops  between  beets  and  dusty 
roadside. 

Kruger,  W. 

Bl.  Zuckerrubenbau,  16  (1909),  24,  369.  (23,  248)  Apply  to  soil  humus  and 

a nitrogenous  fertilizer  that  will  give  an  acid  reaction. 

Labbe,  G. 

Bui.  Assoc.  Chim.  Suer,  et  Distill.,  28  (1910),  1,  119.  (24,  155)  The  addi- 

tion of  nitrogenous  fertilizers  increases  the  disease.  Heart  rot  is  more  intense 
during  dry  periods  and  less  active  with  plants  low  in  sugar  content.  Phosphoric 
acid,  humus,  and  lime  in  various  proportions  recommended. 

Lin  hart,  G. 

Monatsh.  Landw.,  1 (1908).  356;  abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl..  110  (1909),  18,  473. 
(23,  248) 

Peters,  L. 

Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  1909,  8,  25.  (23,  248) 


13 


Ruhland,  W.,  and  Albrecht,  K. 

Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  1910,  10,  16.  (23,  648) 

Sc  HANDER,  R. 

Deut.  Zuckerindus,  34  (1909),  6,  121;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt., 
26  (1910),  8,  309.  (23,  348)  Fertilize  with  liquid  manure  and  calcium  nitrate. 

Stift,  A. 

Osterr.  Ungar.  Ztschr.  Zuckerindus.  u.  Landw.,  40  (1911),  2,  252.  (25,  349) 

Leaf  Spot  ( Cercospora ) 

Griffon  and  Maublanc 

Bui.  Trimest.  Soc.  Mycol.  France,  25  (1909),  2,  98 
Pool,  V.  W.,  and  McKay,  M.  B. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  121,  13. 
from  the  field  while  still  green  and  make  into  silage 
fungus. 

Mildew,  Downy  ( Peronospora ) 

Griffon  and  Maublanc 

Bui.  Trimest.  Soc.  Mycol.  France,  25  (1909),  2,  98.  (21,  642) 

Stormer,  K. 

Bl.  Zuckerrubenbau,  17  (1910),  5,  88.  (23,  348) 

Root  Rot  ( Pythium ) 

Busse,  W. 

Bl.  Zuckerrubenbau,  15  (1908),  19,  297.  (20,  546) 

Hegyi,  D. 

Bui.  Trimest.  Soc.  Mycol.  France,  27  .(1911),  2,  153;  abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl., 
119  (1912),  1,  19.  (26,  747)  Maintain  water  content  of  10  percent  or  less. 
Riehm,  E. 

Bl.  Zuckerrubenbau,  16  (1909),  10,  145.  (22,  347)  The  soaking  of  seed  for 

various  lengths  of  time  in  phenol,  formalin,  Bordeaux,  copper-soda  mixture,  or 
copper  sulfate  is  better  than  hot-water  treatment. 

Stormer,  K. 

Bl.  Zuckerrubenbau,  17  (1910),  5,  88.  (23,  348)  Lime  recommended. 

Root  Rot  ( Rhizoctonia ) 

Briem,  H. 

Ztschr.  Zuckerindus,  Bbhmen,  36  (1911),  1,  23.  (27,  47)  Keep  plenty  of 

available  lime  in  the  soil  and  aerate  by  stirring  the  soil  with  a hoe. 

Eriksson,  J. 

Rev.  Gen.  Bot.,  25  (1913),  298,  14.  (29,  50)  Remove  from  the  field  all 

infected  plants,  disinfect  seed,  examine  and  destroy  all  stored  roots  that  are 
diseased.  Practice  long  rotation,  four  years  or  more. 

Rust  ( Puccinia ) 

Pool,  V.  W.,  and  McKay,  M.  B. 

Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  3,  204.  (31,  842)  Destroy  salt  grass,  which  is  quite 

common  along  roadsides  and  ditches. 


(21,  642) 

(29,  48)  Remove  tops 
This  process  kills  the 


14 


Rust  ( Uromyces ) 

Griffon  and  Maublanc 

Bui.  Trimest.  Soc.  Mycol.  France,  25  (1909),  2,  98>.  (21,  642) 

Yellows  ( Bacillus ) 

Malaquin,  A.,  and  Moitie,  A. 

Engrais,  29  (1914),  9,  241.  (31,  243)  Dry  seed  at  from  40°  to  55°  C.  to  a 

water  content  of  about  7 percent.  A rigorous  selection  of  the  roots  to  be 
used  for  the  production  of  seed  is  advised. 

BLACKBERRY 

Anthracnose  ( Glceosporium ) 

Lawrence,  W.  H. 

Wash.  Sta.  Bui.  97.  (23,  452)  To  check  disease,  cut  and  burn  all  infected 

canes.  As  a preventative,  spray  with  4-4-50  Bordeaux  before  leaves  appear. 
Give  second  application  when  leaves  are  expanded. 

Crown  Gall  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Swingle,  D.  B. 

Mont.  Sta.  Circ.  37.  (31,  644) 

Rust  ( Gymnoconia ) 

Wilson,  G.  W. 

N.  C.  Sta.  Rpt.  1912,  56.  (29,  50) 

BREADFRUIT 

Disease,  Unnamed 

Stockdale,  F.  A. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  Brit.  Guiana,  6 (1912),  1,  14.  (28,  153)  Collect  and  burn  all 

diseased  fruits.  Spray  trees  with  4-percent  copper-sulfate  solution  or  Bordeaux. 

BRUSSELS  SPROUTS 

Club  Root  ( Plasmodiophora ) 

Worcester  County  Experimental  Garden,  Droitwich 

Ann.  Rpt.  1912;  abs.  in  Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  20  (1914),  11,  1010. 
(31,  149)  Gas  lime  or  quicklime  dug  in  or  left  on  surface,  recommended. 

CABBAGE 

Diseases,  General 

Bos,  J.  Ritzema,  and  Quanjer,  H.  M. 

Tijdschr.  Plantenziekten,  16  (1911),  4-6,  101.  (26,  546) 

Harter,  L.  L. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Farmers’  Bui.  448.  (27,  249) 

Blackleg  ( Phoma ) 

Manns,  T.  F. 

Ohio  (Wooster)  Sta.  Bui.  228.  (25,  653)  To  control  disease,  treat  seed 

with  formalin,  use  new  seed  beds  each  year,  and  destroy  all  diseased  plants. 
Rotate  crops. 


Club  Root  ( Plasm cdiop horn ) 


Lawrence,  W.  H. 

Wash.  Sta.  Bui.  5,  spec.  ser.  (23,  647) 

Reed,  H.  S. 

Va.  Sta.  Bui.  191.  (25,  845)  Apply  lime  at  the  rate  of  100  bushels  per  acre 

for  one  or  two  years  before  planting  cabbage.  Rotate  crops. 

Wilt  ( Fusarium ) 

Harter,  L.  L. 

Science,  n.  ser.,  30  (1909),  782,  934.  (22,  453) 

Manns,  T.  F. 

Ohio  (Wooster)  Sta.  Bui.  228.  (25,  653)  To  control  disease,  treat  seed 

with  formalin,  use  new  seed  beds  each  year,  and  destroy  all  diseased  plants. 
Rotate  crops. 

CACAO 

Diseases,  General 

Hart,  J.  H. 

West  India  Com.  Circ.  24,  289,  509  ; 290,  533.  (22,  151) 

Stockdale,  F.  A. 

Imp.  Dept.  Agr.  West  Indies  Pamphlet  54.  (20,  1046) 

von  Faber,  F.  C. 

Arb.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  7 (1909),  2,  193.  (21,  749) 

Canker  ( Phytophthora ) 

Rorer,  J.  B. 

Bui.  Dept.  Agr.  Trinidad,  9 (1910),  65,  79.  (23,  748) 


Bd.  Agr.  Trinidad  and  Tobago  Circ.  10,  1913,  13.  (29,  851)  Bordeaux 

better  than  severe  cutting  back.  See  Exp.  Sta.  Rec.,  20,  1141. 
van  Hall,  C.  J.  J.,  and  Drost,  A.  W. 

Rec.  Trav.  Bot.  Neerland.,  4 (1908),  4,  243;  Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  Brit.  Guiana,  2 
(1909),  3,  126;  Roy.  Bot.  Gard.  Kew,  Bui.  Misc.  Inform.,  (1909),  5,  223. 
(20,  1141) 

(Anon.) 

Agr.  News  (Barbados),  9 (1910),  214,  222.  (23,  748)  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 

Dieback  ( Diplodia ) 

Bancroft,  C.  K. 

Roy.  Bot.  Gard.  Kew,  Bui.  Misc.  Inform.,  1910,  3,  93.  (23,  354)  Cut  out 

and  destroy  the  diseased  branches  and  parts.  Cover  wounds  with  coal  tar  and 
clay.  Manure  and  cultivate  carefully. 


CARNATION 


Leaf  Disease  ( Heterosporium ) 


Blin,  H. 

Rev.  Hort.  (Paris),  82  (1910),  5,  104.  (23,  153) 


i6 


Rust  ( Urotnyces ) 

Fondard,  L. 

Rev.  Hort.  (Paris),  82  (1910),  14,  336.  (23,  751)  Dust  thoroly  with 

sulfur  and  spray  with  copper  sulfate. 

Stem  Rot  ( Fusarium ) 

Wright,  C.  J. 

Pomona  Col.  Jour.  Econ.  Bot.,  2 (1912),  3,  315.  (28.  851)  Use  cuttings 

from  healthy  plants ; change  soil  from  year  to  year ; protect  against  extreme 
heat  and  moisture ; do  not  injure  plants  in  transplanting. 

Stem  Rot  ( Rliisoctonia ) 

Blake,  M.  A.,  and  Farley,  A.  J. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Rpt.  1910,  78.  (27,  752) 

CARROT 

Stem  Rot  ( Rhizoctonia ) 

Eriksson,  J. 

Rev.  Gen.  Bot.,  25  (1913),  298,  14.  (29,  50)  Remove  and  destroy  all  infec- 

tion. Disinfect  seed.  Practice  four-year  rotation. 

CASSAVA 

Root  Rot 

DE  KrUIJFF,  E. 

Teysmannia,  21  (1910),  3,  147.  (23,  547)  Use  lime  on  soil. 

CELERY 

Blight,  Early  ( Cercospora ) 

Streight,  E.  M. 

Veg.  Grower,  2 (1912),  3,  4.  (27,  849)  Bordeaux. 

Winters,  R.  Y. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908,  97.  (21,  342) 


Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  79.  (23,  451)  Dry  Bordeaux  and  air-slaked  lime 

both  effective. 

Blight,  Late  ( Septoria ) 

Klebahn,  H. 

Jahrb.  Hamburg.  Wiss.  Anst.,  30  (1912),  3,  1.  (30,  847) 


Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank,  20  (1910),  1,  1.  (22,  746)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Osborn,  T.  G.  B. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  So.  Aust.,  16  (1912),  4,  402.  (28,  847)  Apply  dilute 

Bordeaux  or  potassium-sulfid  solution  (1  ounce  to  3 gallons  of  water).  Keep 
storehouse  dry  and  well  ventilated.  Destroy  affected  refuse  and  purchase  only 
fungus-free  seeds. 

Rogers,  S.  S. 

Cal.  Sta.  Bui.  208.  (24,  551)  Apply  5-6-50  Bordeaux  at  the  rate  of  35 

gallons  per  acre  when  the  plants  are  young.  Apply  same  strength  at  the  rate 
of  100  gallons  per  acre  when  the  plants  are  over  15  inches  high.  Spray 
seedlings. 


7 


Salmon,  E.  S. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  53  (1913),  1382,  414;  1384,  3.  (29,  846)  Dip  plants 

in  Bordeaux  while  planting  and  spray  with  Bordeaux  once  in  June,  in  July,  and 
in  August. 

Streight,  E.  M. 

Veg.  Grower,  2 (1912),  3,  4.  (27,  849)  Bordeaux. 

(Anon.) 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  16  (1910),  12,  1010.  (23,  148)  Apply  Bordeaux, 

one-half  strength,  as  soon  as  disease  appears  and  give  one  application  each 
week  thereafter  for  three  weeks. 

(Anon.) 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  55  (1914),  1418,  150.  (31,  344)  Copper  sprays  ineffec- 

tive. Manuring  has  no  effect.  Dry  weather  and  artificial  watering  are  prob- 
ably beneficial. 


Winters,  R.  Y. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908,  97. 


Foot  Rot  ( Sclerotinia ) 
(21,  342) 


Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  79.  (23,  451)  Dry  Bordeaux  and  air-slaked  lime  both 

effective. 


Scab  ( Phoma ) 


Klebahn,  H. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  20  (1910),  1,  1.  (22,  746) 


Disinfect  soil. 


CHERRY 

Brown  Rot  ( Sclerotinia ) 

Barna,  B. 

Abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr.  (Rome),  Bui.  Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant 
Diseases,  3 (1912),  7,  .1681.  (28,  244)  Keep  orchards  clean  and  spray. 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1907,  16,  267.  (20,  845) 

Canker  ( Cytospora ) 

Wormald,  H. 

Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1912,  21,  367.  (30,  352)  Remove  and  burn 

diseased  parts. 


Gummosis  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Barss,  H.  P. 

Ore.  Sta.  Bien.  Crop  Pest  and  Hort.  Rpt.  1911-12,  198.  (29,  154)  Use 

resistant  stock.  Cut  out  cankers  and  remove  small  infected  twigs. 


i8 


Leaf  Scorch  ( Gnornonia ) 

Marre,  E. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre) , 31  (1910),  4,  121  (23,  151)  Burn 

leaves  in  fall  and  spray  in  spring  with  Bordeaux. 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1907,  16,  267.  (20,  845) 

Leaf  Spot  ( Cylindrosporium ) 

Stewart,  V.  B. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Circ.  21  (1914).  (30,  848)  Bordeaux  5-5-50  and 

lime-sulfur  solution,  1 gallon  to  50  gallons  of  water,  recommended.  The 
addition  of  granulated  iron  sulfate  prevents  burning. 

Mildew,  Powdery  ( Podospluera ) 

Hein,  W.  H. 

Insect  Pest  and  Plant  Disease  Bur.  Nebr.,  Div.  Bot.  Circ.  2.  (21,  643) 

Shot-Hole  Disease  ( Cercospora ) 

Russell,  H.  L. 

Wis.  Sta.  Bui.  218.  (27,  45)  Lime  sulfur  inefficient. 

CHESTNUT 

Diseases,  General 

Metcalf,  H. 

Trans.  Mass.  Hort.  Soc.,  1912,  pt.  1,  69.  (27,  753) 

Blight  ( Endothia ) 

Anderson,  P.  J.,  and  Rankin,  W.  H. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  347  (1914).  (31,  751) 

Briosi,  G.,  and  Farneti,  R. 

Abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl.,  110  (1909),  19,  489.  (22,  749) 

Brooks,  A.  B. 

W.  Va.  Crop  Pest  Com.  Bui.  2 (1913),  12.  (30,  653) 

Carleton,  M.  A. 

Amer.  Fruit  and  Nut  Jour.,  6 (1912),  97,  78.  (28,  153) 

Metcalf,  H.,  and  Collins,  J.  F. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  141  (21,  748)  Cut  out  and  burn 

all  infected  trees. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Farmers’  Bui.  467.  (26,  146)  Destroy  all  infected  trees. 

Mickleborough,  J. 

Harrisburg:  Penn.  Dept.  Forestry,  1909.  (22,  652) 

Prunet,  A. 

Bui.  Soc.  Nat.  Agr.  France,  69  (1909),  10.  926:  Rev.  Vit..  33  (1910),  838, 
21.  (23,  49) 

Sterling,  E.  A. 

Engin.  News.  60  (1908).  13.  332.  (20.  757) 


19 


(Anon.) 

Forest  Leaves,  13  (1911),  6,  88.  (27,  252) 

CHRYSANTHEMUM 

Crown  Gall  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Laubert,  R. 

Moller’s  Deut.  Gart.  Ztg.,  28  (1913),  41,  486.  (30,  354)  Destroy  or  prune 

deeply. 

Rot  ( Botrytis ) 

Crepin,  H. 

Jour.  Soc.  Nat.  Hort.  France,  4 ser.,  11  (1910),  52.  (22,  750) 

CINERARIA 

Rust  ( Coleosporium ) 

Chittenden,  F.  J. 

Jour.  Roy.  Hort.  Soc.  (London),  33  (1908),  2,  511.  (20,  550)  Spray  with 

potassium  permanganate. 


CLOVER 

Anthracnose  ( Gloeosporium ) 

Bain,  S.  M.,  and  Essary,  S.  H. 

Science,  n.  ser.,  31  (1910),  802,  756.  (23,  448) 

Fulton,  H.  R. 

Science,  n.  ser.,  31  (1910),  802,  752.  (23,  448)  Rotation  of  crops  and  early 

mowing  of  infected  fields  recommended. 

Stem  Rot  ( Rhizoctonia ) 

Eriksson,  J. 

Rev.  Gen.  Bot.,  25  (1913),  298,  14.  (29,  50)  Remove  from  field  all  infected 

plants ; disinfect  seed ; examine  and  destroy  all  stored  roots  that  are  diseased ; 
practice  long  rotation,  four  years  or  more. 

COCONUT 

Bleeding  Stem  ( Thielaviopsis ) 

Petch,  T. 

Brit.  Mycol.  Soc.  Trans.,  3 (1908),  pt.  2,  108.  (22,  248)  Cut  out  diseased 

tissue,  scorch  interior  with  torches,  and  paint  with  hot  coal  tar. 

Bud  Rot  ( Bacillus ) 

Ashby,  S.  J. 

Jour.  Jamaica  Agr.  Soc.,  17  (1913),  11,  20.  (30,  652) 

Horne,  W.  T. 

Estac.  Cent.  Agr.  Cuba  Bui.  15,  English  Ed.  (21,  245)  Burn  out  all 
suspected  cases  and  spray  with  Bordeaux  for  protection  of  healthy  trees. 
Ollson-Seffer,  R. 

Rev.  Trop.  Agr.,  2 (1912),  4,  295.  (27,  353)  Destroy  diseased  buds  early 

and  apply  fungicide  promptly  to  points  of  new  infection. 


20 


Rorer,  J.  B. 

Dept.  Agr.  Trinidad  and  Tobago,  Bui.  11  (1912),  70,  68.  (27,  751)  Ob- 

serve proper  sanitary  measures. 

Wates,  L.  A. 

Jour.  Jamaica  Agr.  Soc.,  13  (1909),  12,  434.  (23,  49) 

Dieback  ( Diplodia ) 

Ashby,  S.  J. 

Jour.  Jamaica  Agr.  Soc.,  17  (1913),  11,  20.  (30,  652) 

Fredholm,  A. 

Proc.  Agr.  Soc.  Trinidad  and  Tobago,  9 (1909),  3,  159.  (21,  150)  Observe 

proper  sanitary  precautions. 

Leaf  Disease  ( Pestalozzia ) 

StockdalE,  F.  A. 

West  Indian  Bui.  9 (1909),  4,  361.  (21,  150) 

Root  Disease  (Botryo diplodia) 

Stockdale,  F.  A. 

West  Indian  Bui.  9 (1909),  4,  361.  (21,  150) 

Root  Disease  ( Fomes ) 

Petch,  T. 

Circs,  and  Agr.  Jour.  Roy.  Bot.  Gard.,  Ceylon,  4 (1910),  24,  323.  (23,  549) 

Dead  or  badly  diseased  trees  should  be  dug  up  and  the  butt  end  and  two  or 
three  feet  of  the  trunk  above  the  ground  should  be  burned. 

Wates,  L.  A. 

Jour.  Jamaica  Agr.  Soc.,  13  (1909),  12,  434.  (23,  49)  Cut  out  diseased 

parts  of  roots  and  cauterize  parts  with  hot  tar  or  by  burning. 

COFFEE 

Leaf  Spot  {Splicer ostilbe) 

Massee,  G. 

Roy.  Bot.  Gard.  Kew,  Bui.  Misc.  Inform.,  1909,  8,  337.  (22,  51)  Treat 

soil  with  carbon  bisulfid. 

(Anon) 

Agr.  News  (Barbados),  8,  (1909,)  193,  292.  (21,  749)  Remove  affected 

plants,  spray,  and  give  careful  attention  to  tillage. 

Phythora  Vastatrix 

D’Herelle,  F.  H. 

Ann.  Soc.  Rural  Argentina,  44  (1910),  68,  40.  (23,  749)  Lime  soil  heavily, 

use  non-acid  fertilizers,  and  prune  trees  to  obtain  a better  circulation  of  air 
and  to  get  more  sunlight  on  the  ground. 

Root  Rot  ( Rosellinia ) 

Patouillard,  N. 

Jour.  Agr.  Trop.,  10  (1910),  104,  58.  (23,  251)  Infected  trees  should  be 

dug  up  and  their  roots  completely  burned  in  the  hole  from  which  they  were 
removed. 


Rust  ( Hemileia ) 


Dybowski,  J. 

Agr.  Prat.  Pays  Chauds,  9 (1909),  71,  159*  (21,  150) 
von  Faber,  F.  C. 

Tropenpflanzer,  13  (1909),  5,  235.  (22,  51) 

Silver  Thread  Blight 

Kuijper,  J. 

Dept.  Landb.  Suriname  Bill.  28,  1912,  11.  (29,  351)  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 


COLOCASIA 

Blight  ( Phytophthora ) 

Butler,  E.  J.,  and  Kulkarni,  G.  S. 

Mem.  Dept.  Agr.  India,  Bot.  Ser.,  5 (1913),  5,  233.  (31,  52)  Spray; 

remove  and  destroy  all  spotted  leaves. 

CORN 

Ear  Rot  ( Diplodia ) 

Burrill,  T.  J.,  and  Barrett,  J.  T. 

111.  Sta.  Bui.  133.  (21,  146)  Destroy  all  old  stalks  from  infected  field  and 

cease  planting  corn  in  this  field  for  at  least  two  years. 

Smut  ( Ustilago ) 

Collens,  A.  E. 

Dept.  Agr.  Trinidad,  Bui.  Agr.  Inform.,  1909,  n.  ser.,  61,  33.  (22,  47) 

Johnston,  T.  H. 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  21  (1910),  1,  43.  (22,  745) 

COTTON 

Anthracnose  ( Colletotrichum ) 

Barre,  H.  W. 

S.  C.  Sta.  Circ.  1.  (27,  446) 


S.  C.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  89.  (22,  648) 


S.  C.  Bui.  164.  (27,  446)  Use  clean  seed  and  rotate. 


S.  C.  Sta.  Rpt.  1911,  23.  (26,  647) 


S.  C.  Sta.  Rpt.  1913,  14.  (30,  538) 

and  Aull,  W.  B. 

Science,  n.  ser.,  40  (1914),  1020,  109.  (31,  643)  Soak  seed  in  water  at 

70°  C.  for  15  minutes  before  planting. 

Fulton,  H.  R.,  Winston,  J.  R.,  and  Cromwell,  R.  O. 

Abs.  in  Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  1,  42.  (31,  344) 


22 


Gilbert,  W.  W. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Farmers’  Bui.  555.  (29,  751)  Use  resistant  varieties. 

Clean  seed.  Plow  in  fall.  Rotate. 

Blight  ( Bacterium ) 

McCall,  J.  S.  J. 

Nyasaland  Agr.  and  Forestry  Dept.  Bui.  2 (1910).  (23,  347)  Soak  seed  in 

bichlorid  of  mercury  or  formalin  for  an  hour  before  planting. 

Texas  Root  Rot  ( Ozonium ) 

Heald,  F.  D. 

Texas  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  22  (1911).  (30,  538)  Rotate  with  wheat,  corn, 

and  sorghum.  Plow  in  fall. 


Lewis,  A.  C. 

Ga.  Bd.  Ent.  Bui.  34. 


Wilt  ( Fusarium ) 
(25,  44) 


Ga.  Bd.  Ent.  Bui.  28.  (21,  51) 


COWPEA 

Wilt  ( Fusarium ) 

Arnaud,  G. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  31  (1910),  43,  517.  (24,  347)  Disin- 

fect soil  with  carbon  bisulfid  and  formalin.  Plant  resistant  varieties  and  rotate. 

CRANBERRY 

Blight 

Shear,  C.  L. 

Proc.  Wis.  Cranberry  Growers’  Assoc.,  22  (1909),  4.  (21,  52)  Bordeaux 

recommended. 


CUCUMBER 

Canker  ( Mycosphcerella ) 

Massee,  G. 

Roy.  Bot.  Gard.  Kew,  Bui.  Misc.  Inform.,  1909,  7,  292,  pt.  1 ; Jour.  Bd.  Agr. 
(London),  16  (1909),  7,  579.  (22,  50)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Middleton,  T.  H. 

Bd.  Agr.  and  Fisheries  (London),  Ann.  Rpt.  Intel.  Div.  1910-11,  pt.  2,  54. 
(27,  353) 

(Anon) 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser,  54  (1913),  1393,  167.  (30,  148) 

Leaf  Spot  ( Corynespora ) 

Altheimer 

Prakt.  Bl.  Pflanzenbau  u.  Schutz,  n.  ser.,  11  (1913),  9,  109.  (30,  450) 

Treat  seed  with  2-percent  copper-sulfate  solution  before  using  or  shipping. 


23 


Grosser,  W. 

Illus.  Schles.  Monatschr.  Obst.  Gemiise  u.  Gartenbau,  2 (1913),  8,  137. 
(30,  149)  Before  planting,  soak  seed  four  hours  in  .5-percent  formalin  solu- 
tion. Spray  with  ,4-percent  Bordeaux. 

Laubert,  R. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  38  (1911).  71,  819.  (26,  447)  Destroy  all  infectior 

and  spray  with  Bordeaux. 

Quanjer,  H.  M. 

Tijdschr.  Plantenziekten,  14  (1908),  78;  abs.  in  Meded  Rijks  Hoogere  Land. 
Tuin  en  Boschbouwsch.,  1 (1908),  159.  (22,  346)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Mildew,  Downy  ( Plasmopara ) 

Jarvis,  C.  D. 

Conn.  Storrs  Sta.  Rpt.  1908-09.  31.  (22,  743)  2-2-50  Bordeaux  recommended. 
Kock,  G. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchw.  Osterr.,  12  (1909),  2,  67.  (23,  47) 

Rot 

Burger,  O.  F. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  121  (1914).  (30,  648) 


CURRANT 

Leaf  Spot  ( Gloeosporium ) 

Lustner,  G. 

Amtsbl.  Landw.  Kammer,  Wiesbaden,  91  (1909),  15,  102;  16,  107.  (22. 

746)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Rosenthal,  H. 

Deut.  Obstbau  Ztg.,  1910,  14,  172.  (23,  650)  Apply  ^-percent  soda  Bor- 

deaux eight  days  after  blossoming  and  again  after  berries  are  gathered. 


Mildew  ( Sph&rotheca ) 

Lustner,  G. 

Amtsbl.  Landw.  Kammer,  Wiesbaden,  91  (1909),  15,  102;  16,  107.  (22,  746) 

Apply  solution  of  1 kilogram  of  potassium  sulfid  to  100  liters  of  water.  Spray 
every  ten  days;  five  to  eight  applications  per  season. 


Rust  ( Cronartium ) 


Ewert,  R. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank..  23  (1913),  8,  463.  (31.  346) 

deaux. 


Apply  1-percent  Bor- 


DAHLIA 

Root  Rot  ( Botrytis ) 

Cook,  M.  T.,  and  Schwarze,  C.  A. 

Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  3,  171.  (30,  151)  Keep  storage  room  dry,  cool,  and 

well  ventilated. 


24 


Wilson,  G.  W. 

N.  C.  Sta.  Rpt.  1912,  56. 


DEWBERRY 

Rust 

(29,  50) 


ELM 

Twig  Disease  ( Exosporium ) 

Eriksson,  J. 

Mycol.  Centbl.,  1 (1912),  2,  35.  (27,  451)  Inspect  nursery  stock  and 

burn  all  diseased  twigs. 

EUONYMUS 

Mildew,  Powdery 

Foex,  E. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre) , 30  (1909),  46,  614.  (22,  351)  Bor- 

deaux or  potassium  permanganate  recommended. 

Janey,  P. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre).  30  (1909),  43,  499.  (22,  351)  Dust 

shrubs  with  sulfur. 


FIG 

Canker  ( Libertella ) 

Dallimore,  W. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  17  (1910),  1,  47.  (23,  454)  Cut  out  infection 

and  burn.  Coat  wounds  with  tar. 

Macro  phoma 

Wolf,  F.  A. 

Ann.  Mycol.,  9 (1911),  6,  622.  (26,  449)  Remove  and  burn  all  diseased 

twigs  and  branches  early  in  the  season. 


FLAX 

Wilt  ( Fusarium ) 

Dallimore,  W: 

Roy.  Bot.  Gard.  Kew,  Bui.  Misc.  Inform.,  9 (1913),  335. 
continual  rotation  of  crops  is  recommended. 


(30,  648)  A 


GINSENG 

Black  Rot  ( Rhizoctonia ) 

Osner,  G.  A. 

Proc.  Ind.  Acad.  Sci.,  1911,  355.  (29,  751)  Destroy  affected  parts  and 

apply  Bordeaux. 

Rankin,  W.  H. 

Spec.  Crops,  n.  ser.,  8 (1909),  87,  208.  (22,  246) 

Blight  ( Alternaria ) 

Howitt,  J.  E. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Ontario  Agr.  Col.  and  Expt.  Farm,  38  (1912),  29.  (30,  649) 


Whetzel,  H.  H. 

Spec.  Crops,  n.  ser.,  11  (1912),  117,  91.  (27,  446)  3-3-50  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. Lime  sulfur  found  injurious. 

and  Rankin,  W.  H. 

Spec.  Crops,  n.  ser.,  9 (1910),  93,  327.  (23,  547)  Bordeaux  and  Paris 

green  found  effective. 

and  Rosenbaum,  J. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  250.  (27,  649) 

Fiber  Rot  ( Thielaiia ) 

Whetzel,  H.  H. 

Spec.  Crops,  n.  ser.,  8 (1909),  88,  229.  (22,  454) 


Spec.  Crops,  n.  ser.,  8 (1909),  84,  143.  (21,  643)  Reduce  alkalinity  of  the  soil. 
and  Osner,  G. 

Spec.  Crops,  n.  ser.,  9 (1910),  97,  411.  (24,  153)  Reduce  alkalinity  of 

the  soil  by  applying  acid  phosphate. 

Root  Rot  ( Sclerotinia ) 

Rankin,  W.  H. 

Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  1,  28.  (27,  247)  Eradicate  affected  roots.  Disin- 

fect soil  with  steam  or  formalin. 

GOOSEBERRY 

Dieback  ( Sclerotinia ) 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London).  17  (1910),  1,  1.  (23,  453)  Remove  and  burn 

all  diseased  bushes. 

Leaf  Spot  ( Glceosporium ) 

Lustner,  G. 

Amtsbl.  Landw.  Kammer,  Wiesbaden,  91  (1909),  15,  102;  16,  107.  (22, 

746)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Mildew  ( Spharotlieca ) 

Dorogin,  G. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  23  (1913),  6,  334.  (31,  546)  Remove  and  destroy 

in  autumn  all  parts  of  plants  suspected  of  being  diseased.  Follow  immediately 
and  again  in  early  spring  by  spraying  plants  and  earth  with  3-percent  iron- 
sulfate  solution. 

Eriksson,  J. 

Prakt.  Bl.  Pflanzenbau  u.  Schutz,  n.  ser..  6 (1908),  11,  121.  (20,  1044) 


Deut.  Obstbau  Ztg.,  1909,  22-23,  340;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt., 
26  (1910),  4-5,  110.  (22,  747)  Select  resistant  varieties,  and  prune  and  burn 

infected  shoots  in  fall. 

Foex,  E. 

Jour.  Soc.  Nat.  Hort.  France,  4 ser..  14  (1913),  775;  abs.  in  Jour.  Agr. 
Prat.,  n.  ser.,  26  (1913),  49,  717.  (30,  750)  Cut  and  burn  all  affected  parts; 


26 


turn  the  soil ; spray  in  autumn  with  3-percent  Bordeaux  and  in  spring  and  sum- 
mer with  .2-percent  potassium  sulfid. 

Fron,  G. 

Ann.  Inst.  Nat.  Agron.,  2 ser.,  8 (1909),  1,  131.  (21,  448) 

Hegyi,  D. 

Rev.  Phytopath.  Appl.,  1 (1914).  22-23,  30.  (31,  843)  Bordeaux  applied 

once  or  twice  during  winter  at  5-percent  strength  and  in  early  spring  at  1-per- 
cent strength  recommended. 

Hiltner,  L.,  and  Korff 

Prakt.  Bl.  Pflanzenbau  u.  Schutz,  n.  ser.,  11  (1913),  6,  73.  (29,  850) 

Kock,  G. 

Verhandl.  K.  K.  Zool.  Bot.  Gesell.  Wien,  59  (1909),  1-2,  48;  3-4,  49;  abs. 
in  Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt.,  25  (1909),  19,  519.  (22,  743) 


Separate  from  Obstziichter,  8 (1913).  (31,  749)  Cut  and  burn  all  infected 

shoots  in  autumn.  Spray  with  lime  sulfur  in  autumn  and  again  just  before 
foliage  appears.  Apply  sulfur  liberally  to  the  disease  at  any  time. 

Lemcke,  A. 

Separate  from  Georgine,  Land  u.  Forstw.  Ztg.,  1909,  39.  (22,  348)  One- 

half  percent  solution  of  potassium  sulfid  recommended. 

Lind,  G. 

K.  Landtbr.  Akd.  Handl.  och  Tidskr.,  48  (1909),  1,  33.  (22,  247) 

Long,  H.  C. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  52  (1912),  1354,  421.  (28,  650)  In  autumn  cut  and 

burn  all  infected  parts.  Early  in  season  spray  with  copper-sulfate  solution  and 
later  with  potassium  sulfid. 

Lustner,  G. 

Amtsbl.  Landw.  Kammer,  Wiesbaden,  91  (1909),  15,  102;  16,  107.  (22,  746) 

Bordeaux  recommended. 

Marchal,  E. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  20  (1910),  4,  234.  (23,  551)  Spray  with  35-per- 

cent solution  of  lime  sulfur  and  burn  badly  diseased  branches  and  canes. 

Middleton,  T.  H. 

Bd.  Agr.  and  Fisheries  (London),  Intel.  Div.  Ann.  Rpt.  Proc.  1909-10,  5. 
(25,  247)  In  fall  or  winter  remove  and  burn  all  infected  parts. 

Bd.  Agr.  and  Fisheries  (London),  Ann.  Rpt.  Intel.  Div.  1910-11,  pt.  2,  4. 
(27,  353)  Spraying  and  pruning  effective. 

Oberstein,  O. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  20  (1910),  8,  449.  (24,  649) 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1907,  16,  267.  (20,  845) 


Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1909,  18,  271.  (25,  248)  To  prevent  spread 

of  disease  in  summer  time,  spray  with  potassium  sulfid. 


27 


Salmon,  E.  S. 

Proc.  Assoc.  Econ.  Biol.,  1 (1909),  4,  150.  (21,  748) 

and  Wright,  C.  B.  W. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  19  (1913),  12.  994.  (29,  249) 

Steffen 

Prakt.  Rathgeber  Obst  u.  Gartenbau,  1909,  257 ; abs.  in  Ztschr.  Landw. 
Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  13  (1910),  1,  58.  (23,  353)  Cut  and  burn  affected  canes. 
Spray  every  ten  days  with  solution  of  700  grams  potassium  sulfid  and  100 
liters  water.  Just  before  leaves,  appear  apply  mixture  of  Bordeaux  and  potas- 
sium sulfid. 

Swingle,  D.  B. 

Mont.  Sta.  Circ.  37  (1914).  (31,  644) 

Vinson,  R.  S. 

Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1911,  20,  427.  (28,  448)  Spray  and  prune. 

Wagner 

Landw.  Ztschr.  Rheinprovinz,  11  (1910),  35,  527.  (24,  452)  During  winter 

cut  and  burn  all  infected  parts. 

Williams,  C.  M. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Quebec  Soc.  Protec.  Plants  (etc.),  3 (1910-11),  80.  (26,  345) 

Lime  sulfur  recommended.  Potassium  sulfid  and  Bordeaux  to  be  relied  upon. 
(Anon.) 

Dept.  Agr.  and  Tech.  Instr.  Ireland  Jour.,  8 (1908),  3,  479.  Remove  and 
burn  affected  parts  and  spray  with  Bordeaux. 

(Anon) 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  16  (1909),  2,  117.  (21,  447)  Spray  thoroly; 

prune  and  burn  all  affected  shoots. 


GRAPE 

Diseases,  General 

Bioletti,  F.  T. 

Cal.  Sta.  Bui.  197.  (20,  548) 

DE  CASTELLA,  F. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  9 (1911),  6,  394;  7,  462;  9,  651;  10,  673.  (26, 

244) 

Molz,  E. 

Ber.  K.  Lehranst.  Wein,  Obst  u.  Gartenbau  Geisenheim,  1907,  316.  (21,  52) 

Nazari,  V. 

Staz.  Sper.  Agr.  Ital..  42  (1909),  9,  609.  (23,  650) 

Anthracnose 

Degrully,  L. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  35  (1914 j,  2,  33.  (31,  346)  Spray 
with  solution  of  8 parts  of  sulfuric  acid  and  from  10  to  15  parts  of  iron  sul- 
fate to  100  parts  of  water. 

Zacharewicz,  E. 

Rev.  Vit.,  39  (1913),  1015,  760.  (29,  849)  Powdered  lime,  cement,  and 

mineral  superphosphate  (2-1-1  by  weight)  applied  three  times  at  intervals  of 
ten  days  has  been  found  effective. 


28 


Anthracnose  ( Glcoosporium ) 

Bos,  J.  Ritzema 

Tijdschr.  Plantenziekten,  15  (1909),  3-5,  95.  (23,  353) 

Anthracnose  ( Sphaceloma ) 

Hawkins,  L.  A. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  105.  (28,  649)  Prune  and  spray 

with  lime  sulfur  when  dormant.  Apply  Bordeaux  after  winter  spraying. 
Perold,  A.  I. 

Agr.  Jour.  Cape  Good  Hope,  37  (1910),  4,  370.  (24,  350)  Dust  mixture 

of  lime  and  sulfur  on  vines  in  summer. 

Apoplexy  ( Polyporus ) 

Ravaz,  L. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  30  (1909),  45,  574.  (22,  247)  Cut 

out  diseased  tissues  and  cover  wounds  with  tar. 

Vi  net,  E. 

Rev.  Vit.,  32  (1909),  835,  676.  (22,  651)  Cut  out  diseased  tissues  and 

cover  wounds  with  tar. 


Black  Rot  ( Guignardia ) 

Capus,  J. 

Bui.  Mens.  Off.  Renseig.  Agr.  (Paris),  10  (1911),  4,  456.  (25,  550)  Bor- 

deaux and  Burgundy  mixtures  recommended. 

Hawkins,  L.  A. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  65.  (24,  50)  Disease  can  be 

controlled  with  five  applications  of  4-3-50  Bordeaux,  soap  being  used  in  final 
application. 

Lerou,  J. 

Rev.  Vit.,  37  (1912),  957,  526.  (27,546) 

P RUNET,  A. 

Rev.  Vit.,  39  (1913),  1000,  228.  (29,  349)  Spray  with  solution  of  copper 

sulfate  or  solution  of  sulfuric  acid  until  bloom  appears. 

Ravaz,  L. 

Ann.  Sci.  Agron.,  3 ser.,  3 (1908),  2,  179.  (20,  949)  Spray  with  copper 

fungicides  every  ten  days  during  early  part  of  season. 

Reddick,  D. 

West  N.  Y.  Hort.  Soc.  Proc  , 54  (1909),  127.  (22,  651) 

Shear,  C.  L.,  Miles,  G.  F.,  and  Hawkins,  L.  A. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  155.  (22,  50)  4-3-50  Bordeaux 
or  copper  acetate,  1 pound  to  50  gallons  of  water,  recommended. 

Soursac,  L. 

Ann.  fLcole  Nat.  Agr.  Montpellier,  n.  ser.,  8 (1908),  2,  151;  8 (1909),  3, 
161.  (21,  52) 

Taft,  L.  R. 

Mich.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  152.  (22,  651)  Spray  with  4-4-50  Bordeaux  in  early 

spring.  If  necessary  apply  2-1-50  Bordeaux  after  July  15. 


29 


Wilson,  C.  S.,  and  Reddick,  D. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  266.  (21,  344)  Plow  to  cover  all  rotten  clusters 

and  leaves,  keep  down  weeds,  keep  vines  off  ground,  and  spray  thoroly  with 
5-5-50  Bordeaux. 


Chlorosis 

Bernatzky,  J. 

Bui.  Inst.  Cent.  Ampelol.  Roy.  Hongrois,  1 (1906),  8.  (21,  551) 

Chancrin,  E. 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  n.  ser.,  23  (1912),  22,  683;  23,  715.  (27,  850) 

Crown  Gall 

Hedgcock,  G.  G. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  183.  (23,  650)  Remove  and 

burn  diseased  vines.  Deep  planting  in  arid  regions  recommended. 

Gray  Rot  ( Botrytis ) 

Istvanffi,  G. 

Ann.  Sci.  Agron.,  3 ser.,  3 (1908),  2,  196.  (20,  949) 

Lafforgue,  G. 

Rev.  Vit.,  39  (1913),  1001,  245;  Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  34 
(1913),  30,  104.  (29,  349)  Powdered  lime,  85  percent,  and  powdered  potas- 

sium permanganate  recommended. 

Thouret,  A.,  and  Vidal,  J.  L. 

Rev.  Vit.,  40  (1913),  1023,  117.  (29,  849) 

Total,  E. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  30  (1909),  43,  499.  (22,  349)  Apply 

Bordeaux  and  soap  when  grapes  reach  full  size. 

Zacharewicz,  E, 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  30  (1909),  48,  664.  (22,  454) 

Alternate  applications  of  a liquid  fungicide  (copper  sulfate,  powdered  soap, 
and  water)  followed  when  dry  by  sulfur,  recommended. 


Rev.  Vit.,  34  (1910),  887,  671.  (24,  649) 

Mildew 

Andre,  S. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  31  (1910),  33,  198.  (24,  51) 

Brunet,  R. 

Rev.  Vit.,  34  (1910),  879,  421.  (24,  452)  Alternate  spraying  with  Bordeaux 

and  dusting  vines  and  fruit  with  sulfur  to  which  has  been  added  10  percent 
of  copper  sulfate,  proved  efficient. 

Burns,  W. 

Dept.  Agr.  Bombay  Bui.  36  (1910).  (24,  649)  Three  applications  of 

3-2-25  Bordeaux  followed  by  a fourth  application  of  3-2-40  Bordeaux  recom- 
mended. 

Cadoret,  A. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre).  31  (1910),  31,  137.  (24,  50) 


30 


Cadoret,  A. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre) , 34  (1913),  18,  557.  (29,  551)  For 

early  attack  spray  with  Bordeaux  or  copper  acetate  twice  at  intervals  of 
fifteen  days.  For  June  attacks  follow  the  above  spraying  with  a powder  of 
bolted  lime,  sulfur,  and  copper  sulfate,  60-30-10  respectively. 

Gervies,  A. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  31  (1910),  35,  256.  (24,  51) 

Alternate  spraying  with  copper-sulfate  solution  and  dusting  with  mixture  of 
copper  sulfate  and  sulfur  recommended. 

Labergerie 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  n.  ser.,  20  (1910),  38,  369.  (24,  250)  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 

Maisonneuve,  P. 

Rev.  Vit.,  34  (1910),  889,  709.  (24,  649)  Bordeaux  recommended  over 

copper  oxychlorid. 

Szigethi-Gyula,  A.,  and  Dupuis,  L. 

Bui.  Inst.  Cent.  Ampelol.  Roy.  Hongrois,  1 (1906),  13.  (21,  551) 

Vermorel,  V.,  and  Dantony,  E. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre) , 31  (1910),  30,  101 ; abs.  in  Rev.  Vit.,  34 
(1910),  866,  71.  Spray  with  solution  of  20  grams  of  silver  nitrate  and  300 
grams  of  white  soap  in  100  liters  of  water. 

Zacharewicz,  E. 

Rev.  Vit.,  34  (1910),  887,  671  (24,  649) 

Mildew,  Downy  ( Plasmopara ) 

Belle  and  Fondard 

Rev.  Vit.,  32  (1909),  812,  47.  (21,  644) 

Bolle,  J. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  16  (1913),  4,  299.  (30,  448) 

Bretschneider,  A. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  13  (1910),  3,  135.  (23,  651) 


Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  14  (1911),  5,  806.  (25,  751) 


Monatsh.  Landw.,  5 (1912),  5,  138.  (27,  652) 


Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  15  (1912),  2,  147.  (27,  652) 

Burns,  W. 

Dept.  Agr.  Bombay  Bui.  45  (1911).  (27,  49)  Thoro  and  timely  spraying 

with  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Caors,  C. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  33  (1912),  5,  140.  (26,  750)  Spray, 

taking  care  to  reach  under  sides  of  leaves. 

Capus,  J. 

Rev.  Vit..  39  (1913),  1013,  693.  (29,  849) 


Chappaz,  G. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre) . 30  (1909),  10,  285.  (20,  1139) 

Chuard,  E. 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  150  (1910),  13,  839.  (23.  453)  Bor- 

deaux, 2-percent  strength,  recommended. 

Faes,  H. 

Chron.  Agr.  Vaud.,  21  (1908),  8,  189;  9,  207.  (20,  548)  Spray  with 

2-percent  Bordeaux  every  fifteen  days  First  application,  50  gallons  per  acre 
subsequent  applications,  75  to  100  gallons  per  acre. 

Terre  Vaud.,  1 (1909),  9,  85.  (23,  251) 

Rev.  Vit.,  36  (1911),  933,  489;  934,  517;  935,  545.  (26,  550)  Direct  fungi- 

cide to  under  sides  of  leaves. 

Gerneck,  R. 

Weinbau  u.  Weinhandel,  30  (1912),  47,  498.  (29,  449)  Early  and  timely 

spraying  with  1-percent  Bordeaux,  repeated  whenever  rain  falls,  is  recommended. 
Gouthiere,  H. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  30  (1909),  17,  507.  (21,  245) 

Guichard,  J. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  30  (1909),  21,  621.  (22,  349) 

Copper  oxychlorid  applied  (1)  about  flowering  period  and  (2)  immediately  after 
flowering  period,  is  very  effective. 

Hein,  W.  H. 

Insect  Pest  and  Plant  Disease  Bur.  Nebr.,  Div.  Bot.  Circ.  4.  (21,  643) 

Heron,  G. 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.  Vit.  et  Leon.  Rurale  Midi  France,  109  (1913),  5,  192 
(31,  151)  Burgundy  mixture  recommended. 

Krankoff,  J.  J. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  33  (1912),  11,  334.  (27,  49)  Early 

and  repeated  spraying  with  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Lerou,  J. 

Rev.  Vit.,  37  (1912),  957,  526.  (27,  546) 

Lustner,  G. 

Ber.  K.  Lehranst.  Wein,  Obst  u.  Gartenbau  Geisenheim,  1908,  111.  (22, 

349)  One-percent  Cucasa  or  copper  soda  recommended. 

Meissner,  R. 

Weinbau  u.  Weinhandel,  26  (1908),  43,  387.  (20,  549)  Two-percent  Bor- 

deaux recommended. 

Muller,  K. 

Grossh.  Bad.  Landw.  Vers.  Anst.  Augustenb.  Flugbl.,  1 (1913),  12;  in  Ber 
Grossh.  Bad.  Landw.  Vers.  Anst.  Augustenb.,  (1912).  (31,  346) 

Muller,  H.,  and  Thurgau 

Weinbau  u.  Weinhandel,  29  (1911),  29.  346;  46,  521  (26,  450)  Spray 

under  sides  of  leaves  with  Bordeaux. 


32 


Perold,  A.  J. 

Agr.  Jour.  Cape  Good  Hope,  37  (1910),  4,  370.  (24,  350)  Apply  flowers 

of  sulfur. 

Sauret,  L. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  35  (1914),  19,  582.  (31,  544) 

Apply  liquid  fungicide  containing  2 kilograms  copper  sulfate  and  1 kilogram 
of  lime  or  carbonate  of  soda. 

SCHELLENBERG,  H. 

Landw.  Jahrb.  Schweiz,  22  (1908),  5,  284.  (20,  757) 


Landw.  Jahrb.  Schweiz,  26  (1912),  6,  420.  (28,  152)  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 

Thiebaut,  V. 

Rev.  Vit.,  33  (1910),  862,  691.  (23,  746)  Apply  mixture  of  1 part  quick- 

lime, 2 parts  sublimed  sulfur,  and  2 parts  copper  sulfate. 

Zacharewicz,  E. 

Rev.  Vit.,  34  (1910),  887,  671.  (24,  649) 


Rev.  Vit.,  40  (1913),  1025,  171.  (30,  150)  Copper-sulfate  mixtures  recom- 

mended. 

(Anon.) 

Weinbau  u.  Weinhandel,  26  (1908),  20,  193.  (21,  54)  Tenax,  (consisting 

of  equal  proportions  of  copper  sulfate,  clay-treated  sulfuric  acid,  and  soda) 
in  a 1-percent  solution  is  recommended. 

Mildew,  Powdery  ( Uncinula ) 

Chappaz,  G. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  30  (1909),  18,  532.  (22,  247) 

Combinations  of  treatments  of  sulfur  and  copper  recommended. 

DE  ISTVANFFI,  G. 

Bui.  Inst.  Cent.  Ampelol.  Roy.  Hongrois,  1 (1906),  14.  (21,  551)  A 

mixture  of  bisulfite  of  ‘soda  and  sulfur  recommended. 


Bui.  Inst.  Cent.  Ampelol.  Roy.  Hongrois,  1 (1906),  9.  (21,  551)  Late 

autumn  spraying  recommended. 

Lerou,  J. 

Rev.  Vit.,  37  (1912),  957,  526.  (27,  546) 

Necrosis  ( Fusicoccum ) 

Reddick,  D. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  263.  (21,  148)  Eradicate  disease  by  removing 

and  burning  all  diseased  parts.  To  prevent  new  infection,  spray -in  May  or  June. 

Pourridie 

Szigethi-Gyula,  A.t 

Bui.  Inst.  Cent.  Ampelol.  Roy.  Hongrois,  1 (1906),  16.  (21,  550)  Lime  at 
the  rate  of  2 kilograms  or  10  liters  of  milk  of  lime  to  a vine  recommended. 


33 


Red  Spot  ( Pseudopeziza, ) 

Dummler 

Wchnbl.  Landw.  Ver.  Baden,  1910,  415;  abs.  in  Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw. 
Osterr.,  13  (1910),  6,  597.  (24,  351)  Two-percent  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Lustner,  G. 

Ber.  K.  Lehranst.  Wein,  Obst  u.  Gartenbau  Geisenheim,  1910,  175.  (26, 

144)  Manure  applied  to  light  sandy  soil  increases  resistance. 
Muller-Thurgau,  H. 

Landw.  Jahrb.  Schweiz.  26  (1912),  6,  313.  (28,  55)  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 

Root  Rot  ( Pestalozzia ) 

Wolf,  F.  A. 

Nebr.  Sta.  Rpt.  1907,  69.  (20,  451) 

Sun  Scald 

Pacottet,  P. 

Rev.  Vit.,  32  (1909),  813,  57.  (23,  48)  Prune  judiciously  and  whitewash 

glass  of  greenhouse. 

White  Rot  ( Coniothyrium ) 

Degrully,  L. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  34  (1913),  36,  289.  (30,  247) 

Spray  with  fungicide  high  in  copper  content. 

Istvanffi,  G. 

Ann.  Sci.  Agron.,  3 ser.,  3 (1908),  2,  183.  (20,  950)  Apply  3-percent 

Bordeaux.  Later  dust  with  powder  containing  copper  and  sulfite  of  soda. 
Begin  application  immediately  after  flowering. 

GRAPE  FRUIT 

Scab 

Fawcett,  G.  L. 

Porto  Rico  Prog.,  6 (1914),  22,  6.  (31,  152)  Remove  and  burn  infected 

parts.  Bordeaux  will  control  disease  but  destroys  beneficial  fungi  which  hold 
scale  insects  in  check. 


HEMP 

Anthracnose  ( Colletotrichum ) 

Shaw,  F.  J.  F. 

Agr.  Jour.  India,  8 (1913),  1,  65;  abs.  in  Agr.  News  (Barbados),  12  (1913), 
289,  174.  (29,  346)  Collect  and  burn  diseased  leaves  and  spray  with  Bordeaux. 

HEVEA 

Dieback  ( Gloeosporium ) 

Petch,  T. 

Circs,  and  Agr.  Jour.  Roy.  Bot.  Gard.,  Ceylon,  4 (1910),  23,  307.  (23,  552) 

Cut  out  diseased  shoots  and  paint  wounds  with  tar. 


34 


Leaf  Disease  ( Fusicladium ) 

Kuyper,  J. 

Rec.  Trav.  Bot.  Neerland.,  8 (1911),  3-4,  371.  (26,  651)  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 

Pink  Disease  ( Corticium ) 

Butler,  E.  J. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Bd.  Sci.  Advice  India,  1911-12,  124.  (30,  845) 

Root  Disease  ( Sph<£rostilbe ) 

Petch,  T. 

Circs,  and  Agr.  Jour.  Roy.  Bot.  Gard.,  Ceylon,  5 (1910),  8,  65.  (25,  46) 

Dig  up  and  destroy  all  diseased  trees  and  roots.  • Isolate  infected  area  by 
trenches  one  foot  deep  and  treat  ground  with  quicklime. 

HOLLYHOCK 

Rust  ( Puccinia ) 

Webb,  G. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  50  (1911),  1288,  174.  (26,  750)  Dust  powder  on 

plants,  in  morning  while  dew  is  still  on,  three  or  four  times  during  growing 
season.  Powder  should  contain  1 bushel  slaked  lime,  1 bushel  soot,  4 pounds 
flowers  of  sulfur,  and  2 ounces  finely  powdered  copper  sulfate. 

HOP 

Mildew  ( Sphcerotheca ) 

Blodgett,  F,  M. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  328.  (29,  346)  Observe  proper  sanitation.  Sul- 

fur recommended. 


HYACINTH 


Yellows  ( Bacterium ) 


Smith,  E.  F. 

Carnegie  Inst.  Washington  Pub.  27,  2 (1911). 


(27,  44) 


IMMORTEL 

Canker 

South,  F.  W. 

Agr.  News  (Barbados).  11  (1912),  263,  174.  (27,  451)  Cut  out  and  burn 

diseased  bark.  Apply  tar  to  wounds. 

LARCH 

Canker,  European  ( Peziza ) 

Borthwick,  A.  W. 

Notes  Roy.  Bot.  Gard.  Edinb.,  1909,  21,  23.  (22,  548) 

Scab  ( Cladosporium ) 

Fiori,  A. 

Bui.  Soc.  Bot.  ltal.,  1912,  8,  307.  (29,  156)  Remove  and  burn  diseased 

parts  and  spray  with  Bordeaux. 


35 


LAVATERA 

Anthracnose  ( Colletotrichum ) 

Chittenden,  F.  J. 

Jour.  Roy.  Hort.  Soc.  (London).  35  (1909),  2,  213.  (22,  454)  Repeated 

sprayings  with  Bordeaux  checked  the  disease. 


LEBBEK 


Balls,  W.  L. 

Cairo  Sci.  Jour.,  4 


Diseases,  General 
(1910),  41,  42.  (23,  552) 


LEMON 

Cottony  Mold 

Smith,  C.  O. 

Cal.  Cult.,  35  (1910),  9,  196.  (24,  48)  Copper  sulfate. 

Gummosis  ( Botrytis ) 

Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Mo.  Bui.  Com.  Hort.  Cal.,  2 (1913),  8,  601.  (30,  51)  Bordeaux  mixture 

or  paste  recommended. 


LETTUCE 

Drop  ( Sclerotinia ) 

Burger,  O.  F. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  116.  (29,  846)  Remove  and  destroy  diseased  plants.  Drench 

infected  area  with  Bordeaux  or  copper  sulfate.  Rotate. 

Stevens,  F.  L. 

Abs.  in  Science,  n.  ser..  33  (1911),  850,  941.  (25,  548) 


N.  C.  Sta.  Bui.  217.  (25,  846)  Remove  and  destroy  diseased  plants. 

Apply  Bordeaux  or  copper  sulfate  to  places  from  which  plants  have  been  re- 
moved. 

and  Hall,  J.  G. 

Abs.  in  Science,  n.  ser.,  31  (1910),  802,  752.  (23,  452)  Prevent  formation 

of  sclerotia  by  early  destruction  of  affected  plants. 


N.  C.  Sta.  Tech.  Bui.  8,  89.  (26,  448) 

Mildew,  Downy  ( Bremia ) 

Schneider,  N. 

Rev.  Hort.  (Paris),  84  (1912),  21,  493.  (28,  446)  Cover  ground  with 

light  dressing  of  charcoal. 


LILAC 

Leaf  Disease  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Giissow,  H.  T. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  44  (1908),  1146,  404.  (20,  850)  Cut  and  burn  all 

diseased  shoots. 


Trunk  Disease  (Poly poms) 


VON  ScHRENK,  H. 

Ann.  Mo.  Bot.  Gard.,  1 (1914),  2,  253.  (31,  750)  Disease  enters  thru 
holes  made  by  borers.  Kill  borers,  treat  holes  with  antiseptic  and  plug.  Burn 
diseased  trunks. 


LOGANBERRY 

Hendersonia 

(Anon.) 

Jour.  Bd!  Agr.  (London),  19  (1912),  2,  124.  (27,  448)  Cut  and  burn  all 

diseased  canes.  Spray  with  Bordeaux. 


MAGUEY 


Diseases,  General 


Gandara,  G. 

Mem.  y Rev.  Soc.  Cient.  “Antonio  Alzate,”  25  (1908-09),  9-12,  293. 


(23,  151) 


MAIZE 

Mildew,  Downy  ( Sclerospora ) 

Butler,  E.  J. 

Mem.  Dept.  Agr.  India,  Bot.  Ser.,  5 (1913),  5,  275.  (31,  51)  Prevent 

the  formation  of  oospores.  Remove  and  burn  all  diseased  plants  before  they 
wilt. 


Smut  ( Sorosporium ) 

McAlpine,  D. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  8 (1910),  5,  290.  (23,  647)  Disinfect  seed 

with  copper  sulfate  or  formalin. 

MANDARIN 

Black  Spot 

(Anon.) 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  25  (1914),  8,  684.  (31,  843)  Prune  and  spray 

trees  and  ground  with  Bordeaux. 


MANGO 

Bloom  Blight  ( Gloeosporium ) 

Cardin,  P.  P. 

Cuba  Rev.,  8 (1910),  5,  28.  (24,  49)  Two  applications  of  Bordeaux 

at  intervals  of  two  weeks  recommended. 

MELON 

Canker  ( Micosphcerella ) 

Middleton,  T.  H. 

Bd.  Agr.  and  Fisheries  (London),  Ann.  Rpt.  Intel.  Div.  1910-11,  pt.  2, 
54.  (27,  353)  Spray  with  Bordeaux  and  disinfect  houses  thoroly  in  winter. 


37 


Mildew  ( Pseudoperonospora ) 

Jarvis,  C.  D. 

Conn.  Storrs  Sta.  Rpt.  1908-09,  31.  (22,  743)  2-2-50  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 

Kock,  G. 

Verhandl.  K.  K.  Zool.  Bot.  Gesell.  Wien,  59  (1909),  1-2,  48;  3-4,  49;  abs 
in  Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt.,  25  (1909),  19-25,  519.  (22,  743) 

Wilt  ( Bacillus ) 

Troop,  J.,  and  Woodbury,  C.  G. 

Ind.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908,  30.  (20,  1044) 

MUSKMELON 

Rust 

Troop,  J.,  and  Woodbury,  C.  G. 

Ind.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908,  35.  (20,  1044)  Five  applications  of  5-5-50  Bordeaux 

recommended ; first  application  when  rust  spots  begin  to  appear,  followed 
by  others  at  ten-day  intervals. 

Soft  Rot  ( Bacillus ) 

Giddings,  N.  J. 

Vt.  Sta.  Bui.  148.  (23,  349)  Spray  with  Bordeaux.  Support  melons  above 

ground  and  remove  all  traces  of  infection. 

MINT 

Rust  ( Puccinia ) 

Noffray,  E. 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  n.  ser.,  19  (1910),  5,  150.  (23,  350)  Spray  with  Bor- 

deaux and  burn  infected  leaves  late  in  the  fall. 

MULBERRY 

Leaf  Spot  ( Sphcerella ) 

Aver  n a- S acc A,  R. 

Bol.  Agr.  (Sao  Paulo),  12  ser.,  1911,  9-10,  727.  (27,  547)  Both  Bordeaux 

and  copper  sulfate  recommended. 

NARCISSUS 

Dry  Rot  ( Fusarium ) 

Massee,  G. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  20  (1914),  12,  1091.  (31,  646)  Kill  secondary 

spores  during  germination  by  working  into  soil  a dressing  of  kainit  or  potas- 
sium sulfate.  Rotate  with  non-susceptible  plants. 

OAK 

Mildew  ( Oidium ) 

Cuif,  E. 

Bui.  Soc.  Sci.  Nancy,  3 ser.,  12  (1911),  1,  102.  (26,  451)  Dust  seedlings 

with  sulfur  two  or  three  times  during  season. 


d' Almeida,  J.  V. 

Rev.  Agron.  (Portugal).  6 (1908),  3,  42.  (23,  50) 

Kirch  ner,  O. 

Allg.  Forst  u.  Jagd  Ztg..  85  (1910),  158.  (23,  50) 

Kock,  G. 

Osterr.  Forst  u.  Jagd  Ztg.,  28  (1910),  3,  18.  (23,  50)  Dust  trees  with 

powdered  sulfur  or  spray  with  Bordeaux. 

Kovessi,  F. 

1.  Cong.  Internat.  Pathol.  Comparee  (Paris),  1912,  2,  Comp.  Rend.,  924. 
(31,  845)  Flowers  of  sulfur  recommended. 

Neger,  F.  W. 

Tharand.  Forstl.  Jahrb.,  62  (1911),  1,  1.  (27,  253)  Spray  once  or  twice 

with  lime  sulfur. 


von  Tubeuf,  K. 

Naturw.  Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Landw.,  7 (1909),  2,  119;  abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl.,  110 
(1909),  24,  627.  (23,  50)  Hot-water  treatment  of  seeds  recommended. 

Yellow  Spot 

Maige,  A. 

Bui.  Sta.  Forest  Nord.  Afrique,  1 (1912),  1,  10.  (31,  247) 


OATS 

Diseases,  General 

Stormer,  K.,  and  Kleine,  R. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  32  (1912),  51,  471.  (28,  149) 

Blight  (Pseudomonas) 

Manns,  T.  F. 

Ohio  (Wooster)  Sta.  Bui.  210.  (22,  453)  Select  resistant  varieties. 

“Dry  Leaf” 

Edinburgh  and  East  of  Scotland  College  of  Agriculture 

Rpt.  30  (1913),  22;  abs.  in  Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  20  (1914),  11,  1010. 
(31,  243)  The  use  of  such  fertilizers  as  ammonium  sulfate,  superphosphate, 
and  manganese  sulfate,  lessens  disease. 

Mildew  ( Erysiphe ) 

Stormer,  K.,  and  Kleine,  R. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  39  (1912),  51,  599.  (28,  346)  The  use  of  phos- 

phorus, potassium,  and  calcium  salts  recommended. 

Scolecotrichum 

Nilsson-Ehle,  H. 

Abs.  in  Bot.’ Centbl.,  Ill  (1909),  7,  165.  (23,  46) 

Smut  (Ustilago) 

Goss,  A. 

Ind.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908,  17.  (20,  1043)  The  use  of  formalin  recommended. 


39 


Yellows 

Clausen,  H. 

Mitt.  Dent.  Landw.  Gesell.,  25  (1910),  44,  631.  (24,  449)  A direct  appli- 

cation of  lime  should  be  omitted ; ammonium  sulfate  should  be  used  in  place 
of  nitrate  of  soda;  phosphoric  acid  should  be  in  form  of  superphosphate  in 
place  of  “Thomas  slag’’ ; and  soil  after  planting  should  be  thoroly  rolled  down. 

OLEANDER 

Bacteriosis 

Tonelli,  A. 

Ann.  R.  Accad.  Agr.  Torino,  55  (1912),  383.  (30,  751)  Cut  out  cankers 

and  cover  wopnds  with  some  good  fungicide. 

OLIVE 

Diseases,  General 

Cuboni 

Ann.  Agr.  (Italy),.  1908.  256,  83.  (20,  950) 

Sooty  Mold  ( Meliola ) 

Vidal,  D. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  30  (1909),  24,  730.  (23,  250)  Spray 

trees  twice  during  season  with  2-percent  Bordeaux,  To  every  100  liters  of  Bor- 
deaux add  1 liter  of  turpentine. 

ONION 

Mold  ( Macrosporium ) 

Ramirez,  R. 

Bob  Dir.  Gen.  Agr.  (Mexico),  Rev.  Agr  , 2 (1912),  5,  413.  (29,  245)  Lime 

sulfur,  1-1-100,  recommended. 

Smut  ( Urocystis ) 

Jones,  L.  R„  and  Vaughn,  R.  E. 

Wis.  Sta.  Bui.  240  (1914).  (31,  840)  Disinfect  seed  with  formalin. 

Pam mel,  L.  H.,  and  King,  C.  M. 

Ia.  Sta.  Bui.  131.  (27,  445) 

Reddick,  D. 

West  N.  Y.  Hort.  Soc.  Proc.,  58  (1912),  194.  (29,  245) 

Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  Sta.  Circ.  21.  (23,  743)  Treat  seed  before  planting  with  solution 

of  1 pound  of  formalin  to  30  gallons  of  water. 


ORANGE 


Diseases,  General 


Gandara,  G. 

Estac.  Agr.  Cent.  (Mexico),  Bob  31,  1,  43.  (24,  157) 


40 


Floyd,  B.  F. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1913,  27. 
Bordeaux. 


Dieback 

(31,  749)  Spray  twice  in  spring  with  5-5-50 


Exanthema 

Bittlebank,  C.  C. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  10  (1912),  7,  401.  (27,  850)  Avoid  nitrogenous 

manures.  Plow  under  green  crops  previously  manured  with  superphosphates. 

Rot 

Savastano,  L. 

R.  Staz.  Sper.  Agrum.  e Frutticol.  Acireale,  Bol.  9 (1912).  (31,  646)  Timely 

tree  surgery  and  substitution  of  sound  young  trees  recommended. 

ORCHID 

Bacterial  Disease  ( Bacillus ) 

Hori,  S. 

Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt.,  31  (1911),  1-4,  85.  (26,  650)  Apply  1-percent 

solution  of  corrosive  sublimate  with  soft  sponge.  Avoid  excess  of  water. 

Leaf  Spot  ( Hypodermium ) 

Brooks,  F.  T. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  50  (1911),  1281,  27.  (25,  755)  Sponge  leaves  with 

a dilute  solution  of  potassium  permanganate. 

PALM 

Diseases,  General 

Coleman,  L.  C. 

Ann.  Mycol.,  8 (1910),  6,  591;  Dept.  Agr.  Mysore,  Mycol.  Ser.  Bui.  2,  1910. 
(24,  650) 

Bud  Rot  (Pyt hium) 

Butler,  E.  J. 

Mem.  Dept.  Agr.  India,  Bot.  Ser.,  3 (1910),  5,  221.  (24,  351)  Systematic 

cutting  and  destruction  of  all  diseased  trees  recommended. 


PEACH 

Diseases,  General 

Essig,  E.  O. 

Mo.  Bui.  Com.  Hort.  Cal.,  1 (1912),  8,  337.  (27,  652) 

Norton,  J.  B.  S. 

Rpt.  Md.  State  Hort.  Soc..  13  (1910),  138.  (28,  148) 

Rolfs,  F.  M. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Mo.  Bd.  Hort.,  2 (1908),  63.  (22,  150) 

Worsham,  E.  L.,  and  Reed,  W.  V. 

Ga.  Bd.  Ent.  Bui.  26.  (20,  757) 


4i 


Brown  Rot  ( Sclerotinia ) 

Barre,  H.  W. 

S.  C.  Sta.  Rpt.  1910,  27.  (24,  745)  Two  applications  of  self-boiled  lime 

sulfur  (8-8-50)  recommended. 

McCue,  C.  A. 

Del.  Sta.  Bui.  85.  (21,  244)  Lime-sulfur  wash  recommended. 

Morris,  O.  M. 

Okla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908,  16.  (20,  950)  Four  applications  of  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 

Oklahoma 

Okla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908,  78.  (20,  950)  Both  Bordeaux  and  ammoniacal 

copper  carbonate  recommended. 

Scott,  W.  M.,  and  Quaintance,  A.  L. 

Better  Fruit,  5 (1910),  1,  19.  (23,  745)  Apply  solution  of  2 pounds  of 

arsenate  of  lead  to  50  gallons  of  lime  sulfur.  Repeat  one  month  after  petals 
fall  and  again  one  month  before  fruit  ripens. 

Stewart,  J.  P. 

Proc.  State  Hort.  Soc.  Pa.,  52  (1911),  181;  Proc.  Amer.  Pomol.  Soc.,  32 
(1911),  281.  (25,  352) 

Crown  Gall  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Swingle,  D.  B. 

Mont.  Sta.  Circ.  37  (1914).  (31,  644) 

Leaf  Curl  ( Exoascus ) 

Arnaud,  G. 

Rev.  Phytopath.,  1 (1913),  2,  24;  abs.  in  Riv.  Patol.  Veg.,  6 (1913),  7,  218. 
(30,  353)  Bordeaux  or  lime  sulfur  recommended. 

Blake,  M.  A.,  and  Farley,  A.  J. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908,  53.  (22,  150)  Remove  and  destroy  affected  parts. 

Apply  Bordeaux  or  lime  sulfur. 

Bolle,  J. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  16  (1913),  4,  299.  (30,  448) 

Farley,  A.  J. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Circ.  29.  (30,  750)  Thoro  application  of  lime  sulfur  before 

buds  open  recommended. 

Gassner,  G. 

Rev.  Asoc.  Rural  Uruguay,  37  (1908),  10,  546.  (22,  748) 

Manaresi,  A. 

Coltivatore,  56  (1910),  7,  208.  (23,  151) 

Quinn,  G. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  So.  Aust.,  15  (1911),  1,  58.  (26,  144)  Two  applications 

of  Burgundy  or  Bordeaux  recommended 


Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  So.  Aust.,  17  (1913),  1,  28.  (30,  50)  Burgundy  most 

effective. 

Swingle,  D.  B. 

Mont.  Sta.  Circ.  37.  (31,  644) 


42 


Wallace,  E. 

Rpt.  Niagara  Sprayer  Co.  Fellowship,  1 (1909).  (22,  652)  Lime  sulfur 

better  than  Bordeaux. 

Weeks,  C.  B. 

Mo.  Bui.  Com.  Hort.  Cal.,  1 (1912),  8,  359.  (28,  152)  Bordeaux  7-7-50 

in  late  fall,  4-4-50  in  spring,  and  2-2-50  after  leaves  appear,  recommended. 

Zauli,  G. 

Bui.  R.  Soc.  Toscana  Ort , 3 ser.,  12  (1907),  11,  325.  (20,  548)  Apply 

solution  of  copper  sulfate,  lime,  and  ammonium  chlorid  at  time  buds  open.  If 
rainy  give  a second  application. 


Little  Peach 

Blake,  M.  A. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Bui.  226.  (22,  748) 

Caesar,  L. 

Ont.  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  185.  (24,  250)  Destroy  affected  trees. 


Rust  ( Puccinia ) 


Perronne,  P. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  35  (1914),  2,  57! 


(31,  53) 


Scab  ( Cladosporium ) 

Barre,  H.  W. 

S.  C.  Sta.  Rpt.  1910,  27.  (24,  745) 

Blake,  M.  A.,  and  Farley,  A.  J. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Bui.  236.  (25,  455)  Lime  sulfur  1-150  or  1-175  recommended. 

Stronger  solutions  unsafe. 

Evans,  I.  B.  P. 

Agr.  Jour.  Union  So.  Africa,  1 (1911),  5,  696.  (25,  752)  Bordeaux 

5-5-50  three  weeks  before  buds  open,  4-4-50  just  after  fruit  is  setting,  and 
4-4-100  when  fruit  is  half  grown. 

Scott,  W.  M.,  and  Ayres,  T.  W. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  174.  Lime  sulfur  recommended. 
Stewart,  J.  P. 

Proc.  State  Hort.  Assoc.  Pa.,  52  (1911),  181;  Proc.  Amer.  Pomol.  Soc.,  32 
(1911),  281.  (25,  352)  Bordeaux  or  lime  sulfur  and  lead  arsenate  recommended. 


Yellows 

Blake,  M.  A. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Bui.  226.  (22,  748) 

Hutchins,  E. 

Better  Fruit,  5 (1910),  1,  64.  (23,  746)  For  three  years  uproot  and  burn 

all  trees  showing  signs  of  yellows. 


PEANUT 


Diseases,  General 


South,  F.  W. 

West  Indian  Bui.  11  (1911),  3,  157.  (25,  348) 


43 


PEAR 

Diseases,  General 

Stevens,  F.  L. 

N.  C.  Sta.  Bui.  206.  (23,  453) 

Stewart,  F.  C. 

West  N.  Y.  Hort.  Soc.  Proc.,  56  (1911),  61.  (26,  55) 

Swingle,  D.  B. 

Mont.  Sta.  Circ.  37  (1914).  (31,  644) 

Chlorosis 

Riviere,  G.,  and  Bailhache,  G. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  33  (1912),  11,  340.  (27,  48) 

Application  of  solution  of  pyrophosphate  of  iron  with  ammonium  citrate  thru 
holes  in  the  base  of  trunk  change  chlorotic  appearance  to  healthy  one. 

SCHELLENBERG,  H. 

Landw.  Jahrb.  Schweiz,  26  (1912),  6,  432.  (28,  151) 

Fire  Blight  ( Bacillus ) 

Gammon,  E.  A. 

Mo.  Bui.  Com.  Hort.  Cal.,  1 (1912),  2,  37.  (27,  353)  Prune  carefully  and 

disinfect  thoroly. 

Hall,  J.  F. 

Wash.  Sta.  Popular  Bui.  65  (1914),  postcard.  (31,  749) 

Hall,  J.  G. 

Wash.  Sta.  Popular  Bui.  56.  (29,  848)  Remove  and  burn  all  diseased 
portions  of  trees. 

Jackson,  H.  S. 

Ore.  Sta.  Circ.  7.  (23.  454) 

Pickett,  B.  S. 

111.  Sta.  Circ.  172  (1914).  (31,  644)  Remove  and  destroy  all  infected  trees, 

which  carry  disease  over  winter. 

Sackett,  W.  G. 

Southwest  Stockman,  28  (1909),  15.  (22,  46) 

Swingle,  D.  B. 

Mont.  Sta.  Circ.  2.  (23,  352)  Remove  and  burn  all  infected  parts.  Avoid 

watering  to  excess. 

Rust  (Gymno sporangium) 

OSTERW ALDER,  A. 

Schweiz.  Ztschr.  Obst  u.  Weinbau,  1912,  311 ; abs.  in  Ztschr.  Landw. 
Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  15  (1912),  12,  1303.  (29,  50)  Destroy  all  neighboring 

junipers. 


Scab  ( V enturia ) 


Lounsbury,  C.  P. 

Agr.  Jour.  Cape  Good  Hope,  33  (1908),  1,  16.  (20,  452) 


44 


Nicholls,  H.  M. 

Agr.  Gaz.  Tasmania,  21  (1913),  10,  387.  (30,  541)  Plow  under  fallen 

leaves  early  in  fall,  harrow  surface  and  leave  undisturbed  until  November  15. 
Spray  leaves  early  in  October  with  Bordeaux  or  Burgundy  mixture  or  lime 
sulfur,  adding  one  pound  of  wheat  flour  to  each  gallon  of  fungicide  to  pro- 
mote spreading  and  adhesion. 

Perronne,  P. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  35  (1914),  2,  57.  (31,  53) 

Smith,  R.  E. 

Northwest  Pacific  Farmer,  39  (1909),  51,  1.  (22,  350)  Spray  trees  in 

February  or  March  with  lime  sulfur;  when  buds  begin  to  swell  spray  with 
strong  Bordeaux;  after  fruit  sets  give  two  applications  of  5-5-50  Bordeaux 
to  which  a little  arsenic  has  been  added. 

Sun  Scald 

Lustner,  G. 

Ber.  K.  Lehranst.  Wein,  Obst  u.  Gartenbau  Geisenheim,  1909,  123.  (24,  156) 


PECAN 

Diseases,  General 

Miller,  H.  K. 

Amer.  Fruit  and  Nut  Jour.,  7 (1913),  99,  12.  (31,  245) 

Scab  ( Fusicladium ) 

Waite,  W.  D. 

Science,  n.  ser.,  33  (1911),  837,  77.  (24,  452)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Grow  scab-resisting  varieties. 


PEPPER 

Anthracnose  (Co  lie  to  trie  hum) 

Bancroff,  C.  K.,  and  Hunte,  R.  L. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  Brit.  Guiana,  7 (1914),  3,  139.  (31,  542)  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 

Ridley,  H.  N. 

Agr.  Bui.  Straits  and  Fed.  Malay  States,  10  (1911),  10,  320.  (26,  448) 

Remove  and  burn  all  infected  spikes.  Spray  with  Bordeaux. 

PINE 

Blister  Rust  ( Cronartium ) 

Spaulding,  P. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  206.  (25,  457)  Import  no  five-leaf 

pines  or  Ribes  stock.  Remove  and  burn  all  diseased  trees. 

Stewart,  F.  C. 

West.  N.  Y.  Hort.  Soc.  Proc.,  58  (1912),  122.  (29,  249)  Isolate  Ribes 

and  other  susceptible  varieties;  destroy  promptly  any  signs  of  disease;  pre- 
vent distribution  of  diseased  pines,  and  do  not  plant  black  currants  in  the 
vicinity  of  nursery. 


45 


Leaf  Cast  ( Lophodermium ) 

Haack 

Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Jagdw.,  43  (1911),  4,  329;  5,  402;  6,  481;  abs.  in  Hedwigia, 
51  (1911),  3,  Beibl.,  202.  (26,  651)  Spray  in  spring  with  weak  solution  of 

copper  sulfate.  Remove  and  burn  all  infection. 

Herrmann,  E. 

Naturw.  Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Landw.,  8 (1910),  2,  105.  (23,  751) 

Maire,  E. 

Rev.  Eaux  et  Forets,  49  (1910),  15,  458.  (24,  53)  Copper  sulfate  recom- 

mended. 

Mayr,  H. 

Forstw.  Centbl.,  n.  ser.,  33  (1911),  1,  1;  abs.  in  Hedwigia,  51  (1911),  3, 
Beibl.,  204.  (26,  651) 

ScHANDER,  R. 

Vortrage  Pflanzenschutz,  Abt.  Pflanzenkrank.  Kaiser  Wilhelms  Inst.  Landw. 
Bromberg,  1910,  1,  33.  (23,  152) 

Rust  ( Peridermium ) 

Haack 

Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Jagdw.,  46  (1914),  1,  3,  (31,  153)  Remove  and  destroy 

infection. 


PINEAPPLE 

Decay 

(Anon.) 

Agr.  News  (Barbados),  13  (1914),  318,  222.  (31,  844)  Cut  off  and 

sear  stems  with  wax.  Cool  and  dry  fruit  twenty-four  hours  before  packing. 
Fumigate  with  formalin. 


PINK 

Bud  Rot  ( Sporotrichum ) 

Molz,  E.,  and  Morgenthaler,  O. 

Ber.  Deut.  Bot.  Gesell.,  30  (1912),  9,  654.  (28,  750)  Ventilate  hot-houses 

and  destroy  all  infected  buds.  Avoid  too  high  moisture  content  of  air  and 
soil,  likewise  use  of  swamp  soil. 


PLUM 


Diseases,  General 


Whitmarsh,  R.  D. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  pt.  2,  65.  (24,  252) 


Black  Knot  ( Plowrightia ) 


Coons,  G.  H. 

Mich.  Farmer,  140  (1913),  14,  425.  (29,  155)  Dilute  commercial  lime  sulfur 
recommended. 


Brown  Rot  ( Sclerotinia ) 


Morris,  O.  M. 

Okla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908.  16.  (20,  951)  Four  applications  of  half-strength 

Bordeaux  recommended. 


46 


Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  pt.  2,  65.  (24,  252) 

Leaf  Spot  ( Cylindrosporium ) 

Stewart,  V.  B. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Circ.  21  (1914).  (30,  848)  Bordeaux,  5-5-50,  or  lime- 

sulfur  solution,  1 gallon  to  50  gallons  of  water,  recommended.  Burning  is  pre- 
vented by  the  addition  of  granulated  iron  sulfate. 

Rust  ( Puccinia ) 

Brooks,  F.  T. 

New  Phytol.,  10  (1911),  5-6,  207;  Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  50  (1911),  1295, 
292;  abs  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr.  (Rome),  Bui.  Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant 
Diseases,  2 (1911),  11-12,  2603.  (27,  48)  Eradicate  Anemone  coronatia,  upon 

which  the  aecidium  stage  is  found. 

Scab  ( Cladosporium ) 

Macoun,  W.  T. 

Canada  Expt.  Farms  Rpts.,  1909,  126.  (22,  350)  Spray  early  with  Bor- 

deaux. When  fruit  sets  use  ammoniacal  copper  carbonate  to  prevent  staining. 

Silver  Leaf  ( Stereurii ) 

Pickering,  S.  W. 

Woburn  Expt.  Fruit  Farm  Rpt.,  12  (1910)  ; rev.  in  Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  48 
(1910),  1246,  356.  (24,  349)  Remove  and  destroy  all  infection. 

POPLAR 

Canker 

Hoc,  P. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  30  (1909),  30,  116.  (21,  645)  Remove 
and  destroy  infected  branches. 


POTATO 


Diseases,  General 


Cook,  M.  T. 

Ann.  Rpt.  N.  J.  Bd.  Agr.,  40  (1912),  155.  (30,  539) 


N.  J.  Sta.  Circ.  18.  (29,  549) 

and  Martin,  G.  W. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Circ.  33.  (31,  52) 

Coons,  G.  H. 

Mich.  Sta.  Special  Bui.  66  (1914).  (31,  543) 

Foex,  E.,  and  Perret,  C. 

Vie  Agr.  et  Rurale,  3 (1914),  5,  129.  (31.  51) 

Jack,  R.  W. 

Rhodesia  Agr.  Jour.,  11  (1914),  3,  399.  (30,  847) 

Jones,  L.  R. 

Wis.  Sta.  Circ.  Inform.  36.  (28,  53) 

Lutman,  B.  F. 

Vt.  Sta.  Bui.  159.  225.  (26,  53) 


47 


McAlpine,  D. 

Melbourne:  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  1912,  111:  rev.  in  Nature  (London),  92 
(1913),  2289,  27.  (30,  48) 

Orton,  W.  A. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Farmers'  Bui.  544.  (29,  549) 

Pethybridge,  G.  H. 

Dept.  Agr.  and  Tech.  Instr.  Ireland  Jour..  12  (1912),  2,  334.  (27,  446) 

Dept.  Agr.  and  Tech.  Instr.  Ireland  Jour.,  10  (1910),  2.  241;  abs.  in  Farm- 
ers’ Gaz.,  69  (1910),  7,  130.  (22,  746) 

Stewart,  F.  C.,  and  French,  G.  T. 

Abs.  in  Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  1,  45.  (27,  151) 

and  Sirrine,  F.  A. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  307.  (20,  948) 

Stift,  A. 

Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt . 23  (1909),  6-9,  173.  (22,  347) 

Tidswell,  F.,  and  Johnston,  T.  H. 

Dept.  Agr.  N.  S.  Wales,  Farmers’  Bui.  31.  (23,  47) 


Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  20  (1909),  11,  998.  (22,  453) 

Bacterial  Rot  ( Bacillus ) 

Osborn,  T.  G.  B. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  So.  Aust.,  17  (1913),  1,  19.  (30,  48)  Remove  and  burn 

infected  plants,  use  clean  seed,  and  rotate  crops. 

Blackleg 

Morse,  W.  J.  • 

Me.  Sta.  BuL  174.  (23,  248)  Use  clean  seed  and  treat  with  corrosive 
sublimate  or  formalin  before  cutting. 


Me.  Sta.  Doc.  375.  (23,  548)  Disinfect  seed. 


Me.  Sta.  Bui.  194.  (26,  546) 

Corky  Scab  ( Spongospora ) 

Boyd,  D.  A. 

Glasgow  Nat.,  3 (1911),  3,  82.  (26,  748) 

Evans,  I.  B.  P. 

Transvaal  Agr.  Jour.,  8 (1910),  31,  462.  (23,  548) 

Johnson,  T. 

Econ.  Proc.  Roy.  Dublin  Soc.,  1 (1908),  12,  453.  (20.  450)  Disinfect  seed 

with  Bordeaux  or  2-percent  copper-sulfate  solution.  Cultivate  thoroly  and  treat 
soil  with  sulfur. 

(Anon.) 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  15  (1908),  8,  592.  (20,  649)  Soak  seed  before 

planting  for  two  hours  in  solution  of  ^2  pint  of  formalin  in  15  gallons  of 
water. 


48 

Dry  Rot  ( Fusarium ) 

Evans,  I.  B.  P. 

Transvaal  Agr.  Jour.,  7 (1908),  25,  64.  (20,  847) 

Longman,  S. 

Jour.  Linn.  Soc.  (London),  Bot.,  39  (1909),  270,  120.  (22,  149) 

Lounsbury,  C.  P. 

Agr.  Jour.  Cape  Good  Hope,  35  (1909),  1,  42.  (21,  643)  Destroy  all 
diseased  tubers,  use  only  healthy  seed,  and  rotate  crops. 

Manns,  T.  F. 

Ohio  (Wooster)  Sta.  Bui.  229.  (25,  653)  Use  only  sound  tubers  for 
seed,  practice  five-  or  six-year  crop  rotation,  and  avoid  the  use  of  infected 
barnyard  manure  as  a fertilizer. 

Morse,  W.  J. 

Me.  Sta.  Doc.  375.  (23,  548) 

Orton,  W.  A. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  110.  (28,  848)  Select  clean  seed 

rotate  crops,  and  use  care  in  storing  tubers. 

Pethybridge,  G.  H.,  and  Bowers,  E.  H. 

Econ.  Proc.  Roy.  Dublin  Soc.,  1 (1908),  14,  547.  (20,  846)  Destroy  all 

suspicious  tubers  when  harvesting;  examine  stored  potatoes  from  time  to  time 
and  remove  those  affected.  Take  care  to  prevent  wounding  when  handling 
the  crop. 

Wilcox,  E.  M.,  Link,  G.  K.  K.,  and  Pool,  V.  W. 

Nebr.  Sta.  Research  Bui.  1.  (29,  47)  Before  storing  potatoes  treat  with  lime 
sulfur,  formalin,  or  formalin  vapor. 

Early  Blight  ( Alternaria ) 

Milward,  J.  G. 

Wis.  Sta.  Circ.  Inform.  3.  (22,  247)  Only  standard,  medium  late,  and 

late  varieties  are  benefited  by  Bordeaux  spraying.  Spray  not  less  than  four 
times,  beginning  not  later  than  August  15. 

Sandsten,  E.  P.,  and  Milward,  J.  G. 

Wis.  Sta.  Bui.  168.  (20,  948)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Stuart,  W. 

Va.  Sta.  Bui.  179  (1914).  (31,  643) 

(Anon.) 

Dept.  Agr.  and  Tech  Instr.  Ireland  Jour.,  9 (1909),  4,  745.  (21,  746) 

Late  Blight  ( Phytophthora ) 

Allen,  W.  J. 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  21  (1910),  7,  571.  (24,  47)  Bordeaux  recom- 

mended. 

Barcus,  M.  F. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Circ.  19.  (29,  549)  Spray  with  Bordeaux. 

Batsy,  F. 

Petite  Rev.  Agr.  et  Hort.,  18  (1912),  421,  135.  (27,  748)  Bordeaux  or 

copper-sulfate  solution  recommended, 


49 


CUTHBERTSON,  W. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  49  (1911),  1261,  122.  (25,  44) 

Finardi,  E. 

Avven.  Agr.,  20  (1912),  7,  290;  abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr.  (Rome),  Bui.  Bur. 
Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant  Diseases,  3 (1912),  10,  2310.  (29,  246) 

Gandara,  G. 

Bol.  Soc.  Agr.  Mexicana,  33  (1909),  20,  394;  21,  412;  22,  425.  (21,  747) 

Bordeaux  recommended. 

Haywood,  A.  H. 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  21  (1910),  1,  63.  (22,  746)  Apply  6-4-40  Bor- 

deaux at  the  rate  of  50  gallons  per  acre. 

Jones,  L.  R.,  Giddings,  N.  J.,  and  Lutman,  B.  F, 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant.  Indus.  Bui.  245.  (27,  544) 

Lea,  A.  M. 

Agr.  Gaz.  Tasmania,  19  (1911),  7,  357.  (26,  143)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

McAlpine,  D. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  7 (1909),  11,  698.  (22,  453)  Treat  seed  tubers 
to  dry  heat  at  120°  F.  for  four  hours.  Such  treatment  destroys  fungus  and 
increases  germinating  power.  Spray  with  Bordeaux. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  8 (1910),  6,  358.  (23,  744) 

Dept.  Agr.  Victoria  Bui.  27;  Dept.  Agr.  So.  Aust.  Bui.  49.  (24,  46) 

Morse,  W.  J. 

Me.  Sta.  Doc.  375.  (23,  548) 

Me.  Sta.  Bui.  169.  (22,  546)  Apply  5-5-50  Bordeaux  when  plants  are 

about  eight  inches  high  and  every  ten  days  thereafter  until  frost. 

Mortensen,  M.  L. 

Tidsskr.  Landbr.  Planteavl,  17  (1910),  2,  293.  (23,  744)  Spray  with  Bor- 

deaux about  July  20  and  one  month  later. 

Oldershaw,  A.  W. 

Dept.  Agr.  and  Tech.  Instr.  Ireland  Jour.,  11  (1911),  3,  450.  (25,  455) 

Pethybridge,  G.  H. 

Dept.  Agr.  and  Tech.  Instr.  Ireland  Jour.,  13  (1913),  3,  445.  (29,  549) 

Bordeaux  better  than  Burgundy. 

Ravn,  F.  K. 

Tidsskr.  Landbr.  Planteavl,  17  (1910),  2,  271.  (23,  744) 

Reed,  H.  S. 

Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  6,  250.  (28,  747) 

Seymour,  G. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  10  (1912),  12,  745.  (28,  849) 

Stevens,  H.  E. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1912,  93.  (29,  242) 

Stuart,  W. 

Va.  Sta.  Bui.  179  (1914).  (31,  643) 


50 


Turner/  D. 

Agr.  Student’s  Gaz.,  n.  ser.,  15  (1910),  2,  38.  (24,  252)  Late  spring  spraying 

with  14-9-100  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Leaf  Roll 

Appel,  O.  and  Kreitz,  W. 

Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  1909,  8,  15.  (23,  148) 

Hedlund,  T. 

Tidsskr.  Landtman,  31  (1910);  abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl.,  114  (1910),  22,  567 
(24,  552)  A loose  seed  bed,  sound  seed  tubers,  not  too  deep  planting,  and 
liming  of  the  soil  are  recommended. 

Lang,  W. 

Wiirttemb.  Wchnbl.  Landw.,  1909,  23,  420;  24,  444.  (24,  46)  Breed  resistant 

varieties. 

Orton,  W.  A. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  64  (1914).  (30,  649) 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  109.  (28,  848)  Select  clean  seed; 

rotate  and  improve  culture. 

Osterspen 

Mitt.  Deut.  Landw.  Gesell.,  26  (1911),  18,  222.  (25,  455) 

Remy,  T.,  and  Schneider,  G. 

Fiihling’s  Landw.  Ztg,  58  (1909),  6,  201.  (21,  243) 

Bohutinsky-Krizevci,  G. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  13  (1910),  7,  607.  (24,  154)  Formalin 

proved  worthless  in  controlling  the  disease. 

SCHANDER,  R. 

Fiihling’s  Landw.  Ztg.,  58  (1909),  8,  273.  (22.  346) 

Jahresber.  Ver.  Angew.  Bot.,  7 (1909),  235.  (24,  46)  Use  only  sound 

tubers  for  seed. 

Schleh 

Fiihling’s  Landw.  Ztg.,  58  (1909),  18,  641.  (22,  347) 

Steglich,  B. 

Sachs.'  Landw.  Ztschr.,  57  (1909),  17,  296.  (22,  246) 

Stormer,  K. 

Jahresber.  Ver.  Angew.  Bot.,  7 (1909),  119.  (24,  47) 

Vanha,  J. 

Monatsh.  Landw..  3 (1910),  9,  268.  (24,  154)  Lohsol,  a carbolineum  prepa- 
ration, 20  to  40  cc.  to  every  square  meter  of  soil,  was  very  effective  either 
when  mixed  with  soil  or  used  for  disinfecting  seed  tubers. 
von  Zedtwitz,  W. 

Wiener  Landw.  Ztg.,  59  (1909),  83,  818;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt., 
26  (1910),  4-5,  117.  (23,249) 

(Anon.) 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  14  (1911);  7,  911.  (27,  351)  Use 

only  healthy  tubers  for  seed. 


Rhisoctonia 


Eriksson,  J. 

Meddel.  Centralanst.  P'orsoksv.  Jordbruksomradet,  1912,  67 ; K.  Landtbr. 
Akad.  Handl.  och  Tidskr.,  51  (1912),  7-8,  550.  (29,  152)  Use  clean  seed  and 

rotate  three  to  four  years. 

Gloyer,  W.  O. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  370  (1913).  (30,  539)  Soak  seed  tubers  in 

solution  of  corrosive  sublimate,  1-2000. 

Scab 

Bernhard,  A. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse.  38  (1911),  15,  168;  16,  179.  (25,  245)  Sulfur  recom- 

mended. 

Holmes,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  8 (1910),  9,  570.  (24,  247)  Soak  seed  tubers 

for  two  hours  in  a 1-30  solution  of  formalin  before  cutting. 

Seymour,  G. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  8 (1910),  6,  360.  (23,  744) 

Stone,  G.  E.,  and  Chapman,  C.  H. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1912,  pt.  1,  84.  (30,  150) 

von  Wahl,  C. 

Ber.  Grossh.  Bad.  Landw.  Vers.  Anst.  Augustenb.,  1910,  58.  (26,  342) 

Soak  seed  tubers  for  one  and  one-half  hours  before  planting,  in  either  2-percent 
solution  Bordeaux  or  .05-percent  solution  corrosive  sublimate. 

Scab  ( Oospora ) 

Bernhard,  A. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  37  (1910),  18,  204.  (23,  744)  The  use  of  sulphur  is 

beneficial,  as  it  disinfects  the  soil,  improves  physical  conditions,  and  causes 
quicker  and  more  intensive  action  of  commercial  fertilizers. 

Henderson,  L.  F. 

Maritime  Farmer,  14  (1909),  13,  291.  (21,  51)  Treat  seed  tubers  with 

solution  of  either  formalin  or  corrosive  sublimate  and  plant  in  virgin  soil 
when  possible. 

Scab,  Powdery  ( Spongospora ) 

Johnson,  T. 

Sci.  Proc.  Roy.  Dublin  Soc.,  n.  ser.,  12  (1909),  16,  165.  (22,  149)  Treat 

scabby  tubers  with  2-percent  Bordeaux  and  plant  seed  whole. 

Melhus,  I.  E. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  127.  (29,  347) 

Morse,  W.  J. 

Me.  Sta.  Bui.  227  (1914).  (31,  243) 

Wart  ( Synchytrium ) 

Bos,  J.  Ritzema 

Tijdschr.  Plantenziekten,  16  (1910),  1-2,  59.  (23,  347) 

CUTHBERTSON,  W. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  49  (1911),  1261,  122.  (25,  44) 


52 


Eriksson,  J. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  21  (1914),  2,  135.  (31,  842)  The  use  of  a 

1-percent  solution  of  formalin  at  the  rate  of  one  quart  per  square  foot  of  soil 
as  a disinfectant  has  been  found  beneficial. 

Gussow,  H.  T. 

Canada  Cent.  Expt.  Farm  Bui.  63.  (22,  545)  Clean  infected  land  of  tubers 

and  rubbish  and  apply  4 to  5 tons  of  unslaked  lime  per  acre. 

Johnson,  T. 

Sci.  Proc.  Roy.  Dublin  Soc.,  n.  ser.,  12  (1909),  14,  131.  (22,  149) 

Jostung,  H. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  36  (1909),  88,  941.  (23,  347)  Use  only  healthy  seed, 

rotate  crops,  burn  diseased  tubers,  and  after  cooking,  feed  slightly  infected 
tubers  to  stock. 


Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  36  (1909),  68,  725.  (22,  246) 

Kitley,  F. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  46  (1909),  1175,  362.  (23,  744) 

Malthouse,  G.  T. 

Field  Expts.  Harper-Adams  Agr.  Col.  and  Staffordshire  Joint  Rpt.  1908, 
19.  (24,  449)  The  use  of  sulfur  at  the  rate  of  pound  per  square  yard  of 

soil  is  recommended. 

Harper-Adams  Agr.  Col.  Bui.,  (1910),  Nov.  (24,  648) 

Riehm,  E. 

Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt.,  24  (1909),  8-12,  208.  (22,  650)  Gas  lime, 

quicklime,  or  sulfur  applied  to  soil  have  been  found  beneficial. 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  (1909),  18,  294.  (25,  245) 

Schneider,  G. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  36  (1909),  88,  940.  (22,  545)  Rotate  crops  and 

burn  all  infected  tubers. 

Spieckermann 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  34  (1914),  2,  7;  3,  16.  (31,  149)  Apply  sulfur  to  soil. 

ZlMMERMANN,  E. 

Naturw.  Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Landw..  8 (1910),  6,  320.  (23,  744) 

(Anon.) 

Dept.  Agr.  and  Tech.  Instr.  Ireland  Jour.,  8 (1908),  3,  441.  (20,  649) 

(Anon.) 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  55  (1914),  1416,  106.  (31,  149) 

(Anon.) 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  17  (1910),  7,  556.  (24,  347)  Use  only  resist- 

ant varieties. 

(Anon.) 

Dept.  Agr.  and  Tech.  Instr.  Ireland  Jour.,  13  (1913),  4,  661.  (30,  537) 

(Anon.) 

Jour.  Hort.,  60  (1908),  3136,  457.  (20,  545) 


POTATO,  SWEET 

Black  Rot  ( Sphceronema ) 


Harter,  L.  L. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  114.  (28,  849) 


Dry  Rot  ( Diaporthe ) 

Harter,  L.  L.,  and  Field,  E.  C. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  281.  (29,  153)  Cook  diseased 

potatoes  before  feeding  to  stock ; sterilize  seed  beds ; use  care  in  selection  of 
seed. 


Stem  Rot  ( Fusarium ) 


Harter,  L.  L. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  114.  (28,  849) 


QUINCE 

Fire  Blight  ( Bacillus ) 

Pickett,  B.  S. 

111.  Sta.  Circ.  172  (1914).  (31,  644)  Remove  and  destroy  infected  trees, 

which  carry  disease  over  winter. 


RASPBERRY 

Anthracnose  ( Glceosporium ) 

Lawrence,  W.  H. 

Wash.  Sta.  Bui.  97.  (23,  452)  Apply  4-4-50  Bordeaux  before  leaves  appear. 

Cane  Blight  ( Coniothyrium ) 

Howitt,  J.  E. 

Canad.  Hort.,  36  (1913),  10,  237.  (30,  246)  Remove  and  burn  all  dis- 

eased specimens  and  plant  only  healthy  plants. 

O’Gara,  P.  J. 

Off.  Path,  and  Ent.  Rogue  River  Valley,  Bui.  4,  1911.  (27,  250)  Remove 

and  burn  all  infected  canes.  Spray  in  fall  before  rains  with  strong  Bordeaux. 
Give  three  applications  of  Bordeaux  in  spring  before  blossoms  appear.  If 
roses  are  near,  give  them  attention  also. 

Crown  Gall  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Swingle,  D.  B. 

Mont.  Sta.  Circ.  37  (1914).  (31,  644) 

Hender sonia 

(Anon.) 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  19  (1912),  2,  124.  (27,  448)  Cut  and  burn  all 

diseased  canes.  Spray  with  Bordeaux. 


Rust  ( Gymnoconia ) 


Wilson,  G.  W. 

N.  C.  Sta.  Rpt.  1912,  56.  (29,  50) 


Yellows 


Howitt,  J.  E. 

Canad.  Hort.,  36  (1913),  10,  237.  (30,  246) 

Melchers,  L.  E. 

Ohio  Nat.,  14  (1914),  6,  281.  (31,  545)  Plant  red  raspberries  secured  from 

uninfected  regions,  in  light  or  medium  heavy  soil.  Manure  well  and  drain 
adequately.  Remove  and  burn  all  diseased  plants. 

RICE 

Blight 

Collier,  J.  S. 

Rpt.  of  investigations  concerning  rice.  Stuttgart,  Ark.,  1910.  (24,  743) 

111.  Sta.  Circ.  156.  (27,  47)  Good  physical  condition  of  soil  with  areation 

at  the  proper  time  will  prevent  the  blight. 

Hewitt,  J.  L. 

Ark.  Sta.  Bui.  110.  (27,  248)  Rotate  crops.  Plow  late  in  fall  and  burn 

stubble. 

Smut  ( Pleospora ) 

Ramirez,  R. 

Bol.  Dir.  Gen.  Agr.  (Mexico),  Rev.  Agr.,  2 (1912),  5,  413.  (29,  245)  Dis- 

infect with  formalin. 


ROSE 

Diseases,  General 
Laubert,  R.,  and  Schwartz,  M. 

Rosenkrankheiten  und  Rosenfeinde  Jena,  1910.  (24,  748) 

Black  Spot  ( Diplocarpon ) 

Wolf,  F.  A. 

Ala.  Sta.  Bui.  172.  (29,  552)  Cultivate  properly  and  spray  with  am- 

moniacal  copper  carbonate. 

Mildew,  Powdery  ( Spharotheca ) 

Norton,  J.  B.  S.,  and  White,  T.  H. 

Md.  Sta.  Bui.  156.  (26,  450)  Apply  vaporized  sulfur. 

Schmidt,  H. 

Osterr.  Gart.  Ztg.,  4 (1909),  7,  249;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt.,  26 
(1910),  16-17,  482.  (23,  654)  Put  air-slaked  lime  around  each  bush  in  fall. 

Dust  foliage  with  sulfur. 

Rot  ( Botrytis ) 

Beauverie,  J. 

La  Pourriture  des  Roses,  Lyon,  1910,  8.  Reprint  from  Les  Amis  des  Roses, 
1910.  (24,  351)  Lime  water,  lime  sulfate,  bisulfite  of  magnesia,  nickle  sulfate, 

copper  sulfate,  or  formalin  recommended. 


55 


RUBBER 

Diseases,  General 

Gallagher,  W.  J. 

Dept.  Agr.  Fed.  Malay  States  Bui.  6.  (21,  749) 

Ridley,  H.  N. 

Agr.  Bui.  Straits  and  Fed.  Malay  States,  8 (1909),  7,  310.  (22,  248) 

and  Derry,  R. 

Agr.  Bui.  Straits  and  Fed.  Malay  States,  9 (1910),  8,  289.  (24,  158) 

Leaf  Spot  ( Passalora ) 

Bancroft,  C.  K. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  Brit.  Guiana,  7 (1913),  1,  37.  Spray  with  lime  sulfur;  de- 
stroy all  affected  leaves  before  transplanting. 

Pink  Disease  ( Corticium ) 

Anstead,  R.  D. 

Planters’  Chron.,  6 (1911),  8.  98.  (25,  46)  Apply  6-4-45  Bordeaux. 

(Anon.) 

Agr.  Bui.  Straits  and  Fed.  Malay  States,  9 (1910),  2,  59.  (23,  152) 

Root  Disease  ( Forties ) 

Gallagher,  W.  J. 

Dept.  Agr.  Fed  Malay  States  Bui.  2.  (21,  749) 


Agr.  Bui.  Straits  and  Fed.  Malay  States,  7 (1908),  11,  515.  (20,  849)  Apply 

lime  and  destroy  fungus  by  exposure  to  sunlight. 

RYE 

Dry  Rot  ( Fusarium ) • 

Hiltner,  L. 

Prakt.  Bl.  Pflanzenbau  u.  Schutz,  n.  ser.,  11  (1913),  8.  (30,  242)  Cor- 

rosive sublimate  recommended. 

Foot  Disease  ( Ophiobolus ) 

Stormer,  K.,  and  Kleine,  R. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  32  (1912),  62,  564.  (28,  51)  Careful  selection  of  seed 

and  the  use  of  lime,  potash,  and  phosporous  in  fertilizers  lessens  injury  from 
the  fungus. 

Smut  ( Urocystis ) 

Ravn,  F.  K. 

Tidsskr.  Landbr.  Planteavl,  19  (1912),  2,  214.  (28,  546)  Soak  seed  in 

water  at  54°  C.  for  five  minutes  and  cool  immediately. 

SEA-KALE 

Rliizoctonia 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser..  44  (1908),  1123,  1.  (20,  451) 


56 


SNAPDRAGON 

Leaf  Spot  ( Septoria ) 

Chittenden,  F.  J. 

Jour.  Roy.  Hort.  Soc.  (London),  35  (1909),  2,  216.  (22,  455)  Spray  with 

Bordeaux  or  potassium  sulfid. 

SORGHUM 

Head  Smut  ( Sorosporiutn ) 

Potter,  A.  A. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Jour.  Agr.  Research,  2 (1914),  5,  339.  (31,  747) 

SPINACH 

Mildew  ( Peronospora ) 

Schneider,  N. 

Rev.  Hort.  (Paris),  84  (1912),  21,  493.  (28,  446)  Distribute  sulfur  well 

over  plants. 

New  Disease  ( Heterosporium ) 

Jennison,  H.  M. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1910,  pt.  1,  146.  (26,  55)  Select  clean  seed,  prevent  injury, 

and  employ  first-class  cultural  methods. 

SPRUCE 

Dieback  ( Sphceropsis ) 

Petri,  L. 

Ann.  Mycol.,  11  (1913),  3,  278;  abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr.  (Rome),  Bui.  Bur. 
Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant  Diseases,  4 (1913),  10.  1660.  (30,  751)  Spray  with  1- 

percent  Bordeaux. 

Leaf  Rust  ( Chrysomyxa ) 

Delforge,  P. 

Bui.  Soc.  Cent.  Forest,  Belg.,  15  (1908),  9;  noted  in  Rev.  Gen.  Agron.,  n. 
ser.,  3 (1908),  10,  424.  (20,  849)  Provide  better  air  circulation  and  reduce 

humidity  by  thinning  out  trees.  Remove  and  burn  all  infection  late  in  season. 

STRAWBERRY 

Leaf  Spot  (Mycosphcorella) 

Swingle,  D.  B. 

Mont.  Sta.  Circ.  37  (1914).  (31,  644) 

Spur  maria 

Mangin,  L. 

Rev.  Hort.  (Paris),  81  (1909),  24,  568.  (23,  151)  Spray  with  potassium 

sulfid,  3-1000. 

SUGAR  CANE 

Diseases,  General 

Edgerton,  C.  W. 

La.  Sta.  Bui.  120. 


57 


Maublanc,  C. 

Agr.  Prat.  Pays  Chauds,  10  (1910),  88,  43;  89,  143;  90,  232;  91,  312;  92, 
379;  93,  502.  (25,  847) 


Blight  ( Mycosphcerella ) 

Wilbrink,  G.,  and  Ledeboer,  F. 

Meded.  Proefstat.  J ava-Suikerindus.,  1910,  39,  443.  (24,  648)  Reject  all 

diseased  canes  as  seed  and  plant  resistant  varieties  when  possible. 

Red  Rot  ( Colletotrichum ) 

Butler,  E.  J.,  and  Hafiz,  A. 

Mem.  Dept.  Agr.  India,  Bot.  Ser.,  6 (1913),  5,  151.  (30,  649)  Secure  only 

sound  canes  for  seed,  remove  and  burn  all  plants  showing  infection,  and  prac- 
tice long  periods  of  rotation. 

Edgerton,  C.  W. 

La.  Sta.  Bui.  133.  (26,  548) 

Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1910,  45.  (25,  452)  Dip  the  seed  canes  in  5-5-50  Bordeaux 

just  before  planting.  Plant  in  fall  and  introduce  immune  varieties. 

Kulkarni,  G.  S. 

Dept.  Agr.  Bombay  Bui.  44  (1911).  (27,  48)  Use  only  cuttings  showing 

white  pith  at  ends.  Discard  cuttings  showing  slightest  reddening. 

Root  Disease  ( Marasmius ) 

Cobb,  N.  A. 

Hawaiian  Sugar  Planters’  Sta.,  Div.-  Path,  and  Physiol.  Bui.  6.  (22,  49) 

Stockdale,  F.  A. 

West  Indian  Bui.  9 (1908),  2,  103.  (21,  147) 

SWEET  PEA 

Streak  Disease  ( Bacillus ) 

Manns,  T.  F.,  and  Taubenhaus,  J.  J. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  53  (1913),  1371,  215.  (29,  352)  Mulch  heavily  with 

straw. 

Streak  Disease  ( Macrosporium ) 

(Anon.) 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  51  (1912),  1308,  36;  1309,  52;  1311,  84.  (27,  354) 

Treat  seed  before  planting  with  solution  of  potassium  permanganate. 

Streak  Disease  ( Thielavia ) 

Chittenden,  F.  J. 

Jour.  Roy.  Hort.  Soc.  (London),  37  (1912),  3,  541.  (27,  45)  Secure  good 

active  growth,  as  fungus  attacks  only  weakened  plants. 

Massee,  G. 

Roy.  Bot.  Gard.  Kew,  Bui.  Misc.  Inform.,  1912,  1,  44.  (26,  551)  Fumigate 
seed  bed  with  formalin  or  steam.  The  use  of  coal  ashes  or  volcanic  scoria  for 
seed  beds  may  be  advantageous. 


5« 


TEA 

Blister  Blight  ( Exobasidiurn ) 

Tunstall,  A.  C. 

Indian  Tea  Assoc.,  Sci.  Dept.  Quart.  Jour.,  1913,  2,  50.  (31,  56)  Spray 

dormant  bushes  with  solution  of  2 pounds  of  sodium  hydrate  to  10  gallons  of 
water.  To  green  bushes  apply  solution  of  6 pounds  of  copper  sulfate  and  quick- 
lime to  100  gallons  of  water. 

Copper  Blight  ( Lcestadia ) 

Shaw,  F.  J.  F. 

Agr.  Jour.  India,  6 (1911),  1,  78.  (25,  46)  Remove  and  burn  all  infection. 

Apply  Bordeaux. 

TIMOTHY 

Rust  ( Puccinia ) 

Johnson,  E.  C. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  224.  (26,  52) 


Abs.  in  Science,  n.  ser.,  31  (1910),  803,  791.  (23,  450) 

Pammel,  L.  H.,  and  King,  C.  M. 
la.  Sta.  Bui.  131.  (27,  445) 


TOBACCO 

Diseases,  General 

Johnson,  J. 

Wis.  Sta.  Bui.  237  (1914).  (31,  448) 

Damping-off  ( Pythium ) 

Russell,  H.  L. 

Wis.  Sta.  Bui.  218.  (27,  45)  Sterilization  of  seed  bed  by  steam  recom- 

mended. 

Gummosis 

Honing,  J.  A. 

Meded.  Deli-Proefstat.  Medan,  5 (1910),  1,  24.  (24,  248) 


Meded.  Deli-Proefstat.  Medan,  5 (1911),  6,  169.  (25.  654) 

Mildew,  Downy  ( Phytophthora ) 

Jensen,  H. 

Jaarb.  Dept.  Landb.  Nederland.  Indie,  1909,  192.  (25,  145)  The  use  of  cai- 

bon  bisulfid  or  potassium  permanganate  recommended. 

Mosaic 

Perreau 

Bui.  Soc.  Bot.  France,  56  (1909),  1,  53.  (23,  649)  Use  only  seed  from 

healthy  plants. 


59 


Phelipcea 


Constancis 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  n.  ser.,  18  (1909),  43,  565. 


(22,  348) 


Root  Rot  ( Thielavia ) 

Gilbert,  W.  W. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  158  (22,  49)  Sterilize  seed  beds 

with  steam. 


Sooty  Mold  ( Fumago ) 


Inglese,  E. 

Bol.  Tec.  Coltiv.  Tabacchi  (Scafati),  10  (1911),  2,  81. 


(25,  455) 


Wilt  ( Bacillus ) 

Hutchinson,  C.  M. 

Mem.  Dept.  Agr.  India,  Bact.  Ser.,  1 (1913),  2,  67.  (30,  50)  Conserve  the 

moisture  and  develop  root  system ; avoid  alkaline  manures ; remove  and  burn 
all  diseased  plants. 

Smith,  E.  F. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  141.  (20,  948) 


TOMATO 

Diseases,  General 

Edgerton,  C.  W.,  and  Moreland,  C.  C. 

La.  Sta.  Bui.  142.  (30,  50) 

Fulton,  H.  R. 

N.  C.  Sta.  Circ.  19  (1914).  (31,  644) 

Hewitt,  J.  L. 

Ark.  Sta.  Circ.  21  (1914).  (31,  644) 

Webb,  T.  C. 

Jour.  Agr.  (New  Zeal.).  7 (1913),  1,  46.  (30,  244) 

Bacteriosis  ( Bacterium ) 

Finardi,  E. 

Avven.  Agr.,  20  (1912),  7,  290;  abs.  in  Internal.  Inst.  Agr.  (Rome),  Bui. 
Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant  Diseases,  3 (1912),  10,  2310.  (29,  246) 


Rolfs,  P.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  117. 


Black  Spot  ( Alternaria ) 
(29,  847) 


Blight,  Bacterial  ( Bacillus ) 

Rolfs,  P.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  117.  (29,  847) 

Blight,  Fungous  ( Fusarium ) 


Rolfs,  P.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  117. 


(29,  847) 


6o 


Blight,  Sclerotium  ( Sclerotinia ) 

Rolfs,  P.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  117.  (29,  847) 

Blossom-end  Rot 

Brooks,  C. 

Abs.  in  Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  1,  49.  (31,  447)  Disease  worse  on  heavy 

than  on  light  soil.  Application  of  sodium  nitrate  beneficial.  Lime  a partial 
preventative. 

Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  Sta.  Bui.  138.  (26,  649)  Subirrigate  and  shade  plants. 

Stuckey,  H.  P.,  and  Temple,  J.  C. 

Ga.  Sta.  Bui.  96.  (26,  648)  To  control  the  disease,  keep  an  abundance  of 

water  in  the  soil. 

(Anon.) 

Agr.  News.  (Barbados),  13  (1914),  315,  174.  (31,  644)  Give  attention  to 

water  supply  and  prevent  excessive  transpiration. 

Canker  ( Mycosphcerella ) 

(Anon.) 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  54  (1913),  1393,  167.  (30,  148)  Proper  temperature 

and  humidity  in  the  houses  and  spraying  with  Bordeaux  should  tend  to  prevent 
occurrence  of  disease. 


Leaf  Mold  ( Cladosporium ) 

(Anon.) 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  18  (1912),  11,  920;  abs.  in  Mycol.  Centbl.,  1 
(1912),  6,  181.  (27,  651)  If  plants  are  young,  cover  entire  surface  with  half- 
strength Bordeaux.  If  flowers  and  young  fruit  are  present,  use  potassium- 
sulfid  solution  (1  ounce  in  4 gallons  of  water). 

(Anon.) 

Agr.  News  (Barbados),  13  (1914),  315,  174.  (31,  644)  Spray  frequently 

with  4-4-50  Bordeaux. 

(Anon.) 

Bd.  Agr.  and  Fisheries  (London)  Leaflet  262,  1912.  (27,  249) 

Leaf  Spot  ( Septoria ) 

Long,  H.  C. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  54  (1913),  1407,  417.  (30,  749)  Remedial  measures 

recommended  by  Giissow  in  Exp.  Sta.  Rec.,  20,  346,  approved. 

Reed,  H.  S. 

Va.  Sta.  Bui.  192.  (25,  548)  Three  to  four  applications  of  4-5-50  Bordeaux 

recommended. 

Vera,  V. 

Prog.  Agr.  y Pecuario,  15  (1909),  613,  64.  (20,  1139) 


Rolfs,  P.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  117. 


Rot  ( Macrosporium ) 
(29,  847) 


TULIP 

Sclerotium 


Elenkin,  A.  A. 

Abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr.  (Rome),  Bui.  Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant  Dis- 
eases, 3 (1912),  4,  1066.  (27,  851)  Uproot  and  burn  affected  bulbs.  Disinfect 

soil  with  carbolineum. 


TURNIP 

Club  Root  ( Plasmodiophora ) 

Colli  nge,  W.  E. 

Jour.  Cooper  Research  Lab.,  1909,  1,  15.  (21,  747) 

Manson,  A. 

North  of  Scotland  Col.  Agr.  Expt.  Leaflet  24  (1913),  24.  (30,  848) 

Pardy,  A. 

North  of  Scotland  Col.  Agr.  Expt.  Leaflet  25  (1913),  52.  (30,  848) 

Chlorid  of  lime  and  lime  water  have  proved  beneficial. 

WALNUT 

Bacteriosis  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Smith,  R.  E.  and  C.  O.,  and  Ramsey,  H.  G. 

Cal.  Sta.  Bui.  231.  (28,  349) 


WHEAT 


Diseases,  General 


Giissow,  H.  T. 

Canada  Expt.  Farms  Rpts.  1911,  239,  244.  (27,  349) 


Take-All  ( Ophiobolus ) 

Mangin,  L. 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  n.  ser.,  24  (1912),  32,  174.  (27,  748)  Burn  straw  over 

field ; treat  seed  with  solution  of  copper  and  dust  with  lime ; sow  late. 

Pridham,  J.  T. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  9 (1911),  4,  250.  (25,  454) 

Reuther 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  40  (1913),  65,  780.  (30,  242)  Select  clean  seed;  use 

nitrogenous  manures  sparingly ; suppress  weeds ; rotate ; and  drain  properly. 
Richardson,  A.  E.  V. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.,  South  Aust.,  14  (1910),  5,  466.  (24,  551) 

Stormer,  K.,  and  Kleine,  R. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  32  (1912),  62,  564.  (28,  51)  Careful  selection  of  seed 

and  the  use  of  lime,  potash,  and  phosphorous  in  fertilizers  lessens  injury. 
(Anon.) 

Bd.  Agr.  and  Fisheries  (London)  Leaflet  273  (1913).  (30,  148)  Super- 

phosphate of  lime  1^2  hundredweight  per  acre  applied  while  crop  is  young  is 
effective.  Iron  sulfate  1 hundredweight  per  acre  checked  disease  in  Australia. 


6 2 


(Anon.) 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  23  (1912),  11,  934.  (28,  646)  Grow  oats  and 

fallow  between  crops. 

Rust  ( Puccinia ) 

Biffen,  R.  H. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  15  (1908),  4,  241.  (20,  648) 

Fuschini,  G. 

Rivista  (Conegliano),  4 ser.,  17  (1911),  19,  443;  abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr. 
(Rome),  Bui.  Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant  Diseases,  2 (1911),  11-12,  2600.  (27,  47) 
Iron  sulfate  in  soil  increases  plant  vigor  and  may  aid  in  resisting  rust. 
McAlpine,  D. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  7 (1909),  4,  255.  (21,  641.) 

Tonnelier,  A.  C. 

Trab.  4.  Cong.  Cient.  Santiago  de  Chile,  16  (1908-09),  136.  (28,  242)  Apply 
repeatedly  fungicides  having  copper  as  a basis. 

Vernet,  E. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed:  l’Est-Centre),  30  (1909),  40,  428.  (22,  49) 

Smut,  Flag  ( Urocystis ) ■ 

Darnell-Smith,  G.  P. 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  25  (1914),  4,  285.  (31,  746)  Before  planting  dip 

seed  in  2-percent  copper-sulfate  solution  for  five  minutes,  then  in  lime  water  for 
five  minutes. 

Schmitz,  N. 

Md.  Sta.  Bui.  147.  (24,  47) 

Smut,  Loose  ( Ustilago ) 

Appel,  O.,  and  Riehm,  E. 

Arb.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  8 (1911),  3,  343.  (26,  546) 

Long,  W. 

Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt,  25  (1909),  1-4,  86.  (22,  745) 

Smut,  Stinking  ( Tilletia ) 

Darnell-Smith,  G.  P. 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  21  (1910),  9.  751.  (24,  347) 

Heald,  F.  D. 

Insect  Pest  and  Plant  Disease  Bur.  Nebr.  Bui.  2.  (21,  642)  Formalin 

recommended. 

Hecke,  L. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  12  (1909),  2,  49.  (23,  46) 

Humphrey,  H.  B. 

Wash.  Sta.  Popular  Bui.  48.  (28,  745)  Before  planting  seed,  treat  with 

solution  of  copper  sulfate  or  formalin. 

Jordi,  E. 

Jahresber.  Landw.  Schule  Riitti,  1908-09,  89;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 
Abt.,  26  (1910),  16-17,  498.  (23,  546)  Several  immersions  of  seed  in  Bordeaux 

before  planting  recommended. 


Me  Alpine,  D. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  8 (1910),  1,  53.  (23,  47)  Copper  solution,  10-50, 

and  formalin  solution,  1-40,  recommended. 

Muller,  H.  C.,  and  Morganthaler,  O. 

Fiihling’s  Landw.  Ztg.,  62  (1913),  14,  481,  (30,  351).  Soak  seed  in  water 
at  55°  C.  for  ten  minutes  before  planting;  plant  deeply. 

Orton,  C.  R. 

Proc.  Ind.  Acad.  Sci.,  1911,  343.  (29,  750)  Treat  seed  before  planting  with 

1-percent  solution  of  formalin. 

Reynolds,  M.  H. 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  24  (1913),  6,  461.  (29,  750) 

Richardson,  A.  E.  V. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  So.  Aust..  13  (1910),  6,  491.  (23,  47) 

Roberts,  H.  F.,  and  Graff,  P.  W. 

Kans.  Sta.  Circ.  12.  (24,  153)  Jensen  modified  hot-water  treatment  recom- 

mended. 

Soutter,  R. 

Queensland  Agr.  Jour.,  28  (1912),  1,  1.  (26,  746) 

Stormer,  K. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  38  (1911),  80.  917;  81,  929.  (26,  447) 

Sutton,  G.  L.,  and  Downing,  R.  G. 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  21  (1910),  5,  382;  abs.  in  Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  So.  Aust., 
13  (1910),  11,  960;  Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser..  48  (1910),  1128,  22.  (23,  742)  Treat 

seed  before  planting  with  a solution  of  copper  sulfate  and  salt. 

( Anon.  ) 

Landw.  Ztschr.  Rheinprovinz,  10  (1909),  40,  585.  (23,  349) 

(Anon.) 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  23  (1912),  5,  396.  (27,  649) 

WILLOW 

Armillaria 

Brooks,  F.  T. 

Gard.  Chron.,  3 ser.,  49  (1911),  1260,  100.  (24,  748)  Replace  diseased 

willows  with  ash,  as  ash  are  immune. 


MISCELLANEOUS 

CITRUS  FRUITS 

Diseases,  General 

Rolfs,  P.  H.,  Fawcett,  H.  S.,  and  Floyd,  B.  F. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  108.  (26,  549) 

Ross,  C. 

Queensland  Agr.  Jour.,  n.  ser.,  1 (1914),  1,  48.  (31,  244) 


64 

Blight 

Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Proc.  Fla.  State  Hort.  Soc.,  22  (1909),  75.  (22,  350) 

Canker 

Stevens,  H.  E. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  122  (1914).  (31,  54)  Careful  inspection  of  nursery  stock, 

destruction  by  burning  of  small  infected  trees,  and  pruning  off  and  burning 
of  all  diseased  parts  of  larger  trees  recommended. 

Foot  Rot 

Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Proc.  Fla.  State  Hort.  Soc.,  22  (1909),  75.  (22,  350) 

Gummosis 

Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Proc.  Fla.  State  Hort.  Soc.,  22  (1909),  75.  (22,  350) 

Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  1,  54.  (31,  449)  Avoid  conditions  favorable  for 
infection ; make  all  new  plantings  with  trees  budded  high  on  sour  stocks ; and 
trim  out  and  paint  trunks  with  concentrated  Bordeaux. 

Floyd,  B.  F. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1913,  27.  (31,  749) 

Knot  ( Spluzropsis ) 

Hedges,  F.,  and  Tenny,  L.  S. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant.  Indus.  Bui.  247.  (27,  652)  Remove  and 

burn  all  diseased  limbs. 


Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  109. 


Scab  ( Cladosporium ) 

(27,  653)  Ammoniacal  copper  carbonate  recommended. 


Proc.  Fla.  State  Hort.  Soc.,  22  (1909),  75.  (22,  350) 

Scaly  Bark  ( Colletotrichum ) 

Essig,  E.  O. 

Pomona  Col.  Jour.  Econ.  Bot.,  1 (1911),  1,  25.  (24,  747)  Bordeaux  4-4-50 

recommended. 

Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Proc.  Fla.  State  Hort.  Soc.,  22  (1909),  75.  (22,  350) 


Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  44.  (23,  446) 


Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1910,  45.  (25,  450)  Scrape  off  diseased  bark,  paint  surface 

with  carbolineum  mixture  consisting  of  1 gallon  of  carbolineum  and  1 gallon  of 
water  in  which  1 pound  of  whale  oil  soap  has  been  dissolved. 


Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  98.  (20,  1045)  Bordeaux  recommended. 


65 


Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  106.  (25,  551)  Bordeaux  recommended. 

Rolfs,  P.  H. 

Pomona  Col.  Jour.  Econ.  Bot.,  1 (1911),  3,  107.  (27,  50) 

Stem-end  Rot  ( Phomopsis ) 

Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  107.  (26,  449)  Destroy  infected  branches  and  fruit  and  spray 

against  scale  insects.  Cull  fruit  to  be  shipped  and  keep  cool  in  transit. 
Stevens,  H.  E. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1913,  72  (31,  750)  Bordeaux  recommended. 


Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  111.  (28,  651)  Prune  out  dead  branches,  spray  with  Bordeaux 

or  ammoniacal  copper  carbonate,  and  destroy  all  infected  fruit. 

FIELD  CROPS 

Diseases,  General 

Jackson,  H.  S. 

Del.  Sta.  Bui.  83.  (20,  946) 

Whetzel,  H.  H. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  283.  (24,  550) 

CEREALS 

Diseases,  General 

Bolley,  H.  L. 

N.  D.  Sta.  Bui.  87.  (22,  744) 

Foex,  E. 

Rev.  Phytopath.  Appl.,  1 (1914),  18-19.  13;  20-21,  17;  22-23,  25.  (31,  841) 

Hoffmann,  M. 

Jahresber.  Landw.,  24  (1909),  203.  (24,  345) 

Ho  WITT,  J.  E. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Ontario  Agr.  Col.  and  Expt.  Farm,  37  (1911),  47.  (27,  746) 

Kirch ner,  O. 

Wiirttemb.  Wchnbl.  Landw.,  1913,  29,  Beilage,  439;  30,  Beilage,  445.  (29,  845) 
Muller,  H.  C.,  Molz  E.,  and  Morgenthaler,  D. 

Ber.  Agr.  Chem.  Kontroll  u.  Vers.  Stat.  Pflanzenkrank.  Prov.  Sachsen,  1912, 
67.  (30,  148) 

Muller,  H.  C.,  Stormer,  K.,  et.  al. 

Ber.  Agr.  Chem.  Kontroll  u.  Vers.  Stat.  Pflanzenkrank.  Prov.  Sachsen,  1910, 
71.  (26,  142) 

Stormer,  K. 

Landw.  Wchnschr.  Sachsen,  12  (1910),  2,  10;  3.  19;  4,  27.  (22.  741) 

Anthracnose  ( Collet otrichum ) 

Selby,  A.  D.,  and  Manns,  T.  F. 

Ohio  (Wooster)  Sta.  Bui.  203.  (21.  745) 


66 


Foot  Disease  ( Ophiobolus ) 

Guerrapain,  A.,  and  Demolon,  A. 

Betterave,  23  (1913),  597,  386;  598,  402;  24  (1914),  599,  7.  (30,  747) 

Mildew 

Reed,  G.  M. 

Bui.  Torrey  Bot.  Club,  36  (1909),  7,  353.  (21,  641) 

Rust  ( Puccinia ) 

Freeman,  E.  M.,  and  Johnson,  E.  C. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  216.  (25,  651)  Breed  resistant 

varieties. 


Jordi,  E. 

Jahresber.  Landw.  Schule  Rutti,  1909-10,  108.  (24,  345) 

La  mont,  W.  J. 

Agr.  Jour.  Cape  Good  Hope,  37  (1910),  3,  243.  (24,  346) 


McAlpine,  D. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  8 (1910),  5,  284.  (23,  649) 


Smut 


Appel,  O. 

Mitt.  Deut.  Landw.  Gesell.,  24  (1909),  16,  256.  (21,  549) 


Jahrb.  Deut.  Landw.  Gesell.,  24  (1909),  2,  319.  (21,  642) 

and  Riehm,  E. 

Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  1910,  10,  7.  (23,  646)  Soak  seed  for 

five  hours  in  water  at  25°  C.  Then  dry  for  25  minutes  at  60°  C. 

Broz,  O. 

Monatsh.  Landw.,  4 (1911),  10,  289;  5 (1912),  1,  17.  (27,  246)  Sterilize 

seed  with  formalin  or  copper  sulfate. 

Burmester,  H. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  18  (1908),  3,  154.  (21,  242) 

DTpollito,  G. 

Bol.  Quind.  Soc.  Agr.  I tal.,  16  (1911),  19,  680;  abs.  in  Riv.  Patol.  Veg.,  5 
(1911),  9,  133.  (27,  149)  Hot-water  treatment  of  seed  recommended. 
Eriksson,  J. 

K.  Landtbr.  Akad.  Handl.  och  Tidskr.,  47  (1908),  4,  274.  (22,  246) 

Falck,  R. 

Jour.  Landw.,  56  (1908),  2,  173.  (20,  648) 

Freeman,  E.  M.,  and  Stackman,  E.  C. 

Minn.  Sta.  Bui.  122.  (25,  144)  Sterilize  seed  with  formalin,  copper  sulfate, 

or  hot  water. 

Gussow,  H.  T. 

Canada  Central  Expt.  Farm  Bui.  73.  (30,  47) 

Hughes,  H.  D.,  and  Taft,  P.  C. 

Ia.  Sta.  Circ.  11  (1913).  (31,  344) 

Johnson,  E.  C. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Farmers’  Bui.  507.  (28,  51) 


6 7 


J0RDI,  E. 

Jahresber.  Landw.  Schule  Riitti,  1909-10,  108.  (24,  345)  Breed  resistant 

varieties. 

Kirch ner,  O. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  29  (1909),  30,  305.  (21,  446) 

Lang,  H. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  28  (1908),  70,  603.  (20,  947)  Soak  seed  from  6 to  12 

hours  in  water  at  ordinary  temperature.  Then  subject  to  air  heated  to  60°  C. 
McAlpine,  D. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  8 (1910),  5,  284.  (23,  649) 


Melbourne  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  1910,  288.  (24,  45) 

Murray,  J. 

Canada  Expt.  Farms  Rpts.  1909,  275.  (22,  345) 

Pye,  H. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  7 (1909),  6,  368.  (21,  641) 

Reed,  G.  M. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Mo.  Bd.  Agr,  44  (1911),  253.  (28,  51) 
Riehm,  E. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  36  (1909),  35,  373.  (21,  446) 


Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  40  (1913),  10,  107.  (29.  47) 

Stevens,  F.  L. 

N.  C.  Sta.  Bui.  212.  (24,  246) 

Stewart,  R,  and  Stephens,  J. 

Utah  Sta.  Bui.  108.  (23,  742) 

Stormer,  K,  et  al. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse.  38  (1911),  88,  1005.  (27,  246)  Modified  hot-water 

treatment  recommended. 

Wilcox,  E.  M. 

Nebr.  Sta.  Bui.  131.  (28,  445) 

Zavitz,  C.  A. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Ontario  Agr.  Col.  and  Expt.  Farm,  34  (1908),  183.  (21,  341) 

Immerse  seed  in  formalin  solution  (1  pint  of  formalin  to  42  gallons  of  water)  for 
20  minutes. 

Smut,  Loose  ( Ustilago ) 

Appel,  O. 

Ber.  Deut.  Bot.  Gesell,  27  (1909),  10,  606.  (23,  46)  Flot-water  treatment 

of  seeds  recommended. 


Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  30  (1910),  15,  126.  (23,  148) 
and  Riehm,  E. 

Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  1909,  8,  9.  (23,  247) 


Min.  Bl.  K.  Preuss.  Verwalt.  Landw.,  Domanen  u.  Forsten,  7 (1911),  5, 
118.  (25,  453)  Apparatus  for  hot-air  and  hot- water  treatments  described. 


68 


Arthur,  J.  C.,  and  Johnson,  A.  C. 

Ind.  Sta.  Circ.  22.  (23,  147)  Formalin  recommended. 

Cook,  M.  T. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Circ.  36.  (31,  446) 

Detken,  W. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  29  (1909),  83,  783.  (22,  345)  Soak  seed  in  cold  water 

for  several  hours ; then  dry  at  60°  C. 

Freeman,  E.  M.,  and  Johnson,  E.  C. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  152.  (21,  445) 

Loch  head,  W. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Quebec  Soc.  Protec.  Plants  (etc.),  3 (1910-11),  67.  (26,  341) 

Schander,  R. 

Landw.  Centbl.  Posen,  1910,  5;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.  (etc.),  2 Abt.,  28  (1910), 
9-11,  302.  (24,  346) 


Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  37  (1910),  30,  333.  (24,  346)  Hot-water  method  of 

treatment  described  in  full. 


Mitt.  Kaiser  Wilhelms  Inst.  Landw.  Bromberg,  6 (1914),  2,  132.  (31,  147) 

Stormer,  K. 

Landw.  Wchnschr.  Sachsen,  10  (1908),  35,  306;  38,  331;  39,  340;  40,  347 
(20,  1042) 


Landw.  Wchnschr.  Sachsen,  12  (1910),  12,  91.  (23,  346) 

Smut,  Stinking  ( Tilletia ) 

Appel,  O. 

Mitt.  Deut.  Landw.  Gesell.,  28  (1913),  16,  1.  (30,  449) 

Cook,  M.  T. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Circ.  36.  (31.  446) 

Ditzell,  F.,  and  Downing,  R.  G. 

Agr.  Gaz.  N.  S.  Wales,  22  (1911),  4,  341.  (25,  750)  Copper  sulfate,  copper 

sulfate  and  lime-water,  copper  sulfate  and  sodium  chlorid,  Fungusine,  and 
Bordeaux  paste  all  recommended. 

Loch  head,  W. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Quebec  Soc.  Protec.  Plants  (etc.),  3 (1910-11),  67.  (26,  341) 

Orton,  C.  R. 

Proc.  Ind.  Acad.  Sci.,  1911,  343.  (29,  750) 

Stewart,  R.,  and  Stephens,  J. 

Utah  Sta.  Bui.  108.  (23,  742) 

Straw  Blight 

Fron,  G. 

Abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr.  (Rome),  Bui.  Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant  Diseases, 
3 (1912),  4,  1054.  (27,  747) 

(Anon.) 

Ann.  Uffic.  Agr.  Prov.  Bologna,  18  (1911-12),  194.  (30,  349) 


69 

TREES,  GENERAL 

Diseases,  General 


Forbes,  A.  C. 

Dept.  Agr.  and  Tech.  Instr.  Ireland  Jour.,  10  (1909),  1,  35.  (22,  549) 

Kock,  G. 

Sep.  from  Landes  Amtsbl.  Erzherzogt.  Osterr.  unter  der  Enns,  1909,  4-5,  36 
(23,  553) 

Massee,  G. 

Diseases  of  Cultivated  Plants  and  Trees.  New  York  and  London,  1910. 
(24,  44) 

Mer,  E. 

Bui.  Soc.  Nat.  Agr.  France,  70  (1910),  7,  652.  (24,  251) 


von  Schrenk,  H.,  and  Spaulding,  P. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  149.  (21,  448) 

Root  Rot  ( Agaricus ) 

Adespeissis,  A. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  West  Aust.,  17  (1908),  1,  534.  (20,  1141) 


TREES,  CONIFEROUS 

Damping-off  ( Pythium ) 

Hartley,  C.  P. 

Science,  n.  ser.,  36  (1912),  933,  683.  (28,  246) 

Gray  Mold  ( Botrytis ) 

(Anon.) 

Bd.  Agr.  and  Fisheries  (London)  Leaflet  234.  (23,  653)  Burn  all  diseased 

seedlings  and  spray  with  a solution  of  11  pounds  copper  sulfate,  16  pounds  copper 
carbonate,  1 pound  potassium  permanganate,  and  3 pounds  soft  soap  in  100 
gallons  of  rain  water. 


Phoma 


Mer,  E. 

Bui.  Soc.  Sci.  Nancy,  3 ser.,  9 (1908),  2,  104. 


(20,  849) 


TREES,  FRUIT 

Diseases,  General 

Bethune,  C.  J.  S. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Ontario  Agr.  Col.  and  Expt.  Farm,  35  (1909),  34.  (23,  351) 

Collinge,  W.  E. 

Rpt.  Econ.  Biol,  2 (1912),  41.  (26,  445) 

Giissow,  H.  T. 

Canada  Exp.  Farms  Rpts.  1911,  239.  (27,  349) 

Heald,  F.  D. 

Texas  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  22  (1911).  (30,  537) 

Kirch ner,  O. 

Wiirttemb.  Wchnbl.  Landw,  1913,  29,  439;  30,  455.  (29,  845) 


70 


Lewis,  A.  C. 

Ga.  Bd.  Ent.  Bui.  32  (1910),  35.  (24,  745) 

Linsbauer,  L.,  Zweigelt,  F.,  and  Zuderwell,  H. 

Programm  u.  Jahresber.  K.  K.  Hoh.  Lehranst.  Wein  u.  Obstbau  Klos- 
terneuburg,  1912-13,  159.  (30,  240) 

Lloyd,  F.  E.,  Ridgway,  C.  S.,  and  Chatterton,  H.  J. 

Bui.  Agr.  Dept.  (Ala.),  32.  (23,  247) 

Morse,  W.  J. 

Me.  Sta.  Bui.  164.  (21,  144) 

Muller,  H.  C.,  Molz,  E.,  and  Morgenthaler,  D. 

Ber.  Agr.  Chem.  Krontoll  u.  Vers.  Stat.  Pflanzenkrank.  Prov.  Sachsen,  1912, 
67.  (30,  148) 

Norton,  J.  B.  S.,  and  Norman,  A.  J. 

Md.  Sta.  Bui.  143.  (23,  252) 

Pam mel,  L.  H. 

Trans.  Iowa  Hort.  Soc.,  47  (1912),  196.  (29,  445) 

Reed,  G.  M. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Mo.  Bd.  Hort.,  5 (1912),  342.  (28,  243) 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1912,  21,  321.  (30,  348) 

Selby,  A.  D. 

Ohio  State  Hort.  Soc.  Ann.  Rpt.,  43  (1910),  77.  (24,  447) 

Tompson,  H.  C. 

Miss.  Sta.  Bui.  141.  (24,  45) 

Westerdyjk,  Johanna 

Phytopath.  Lab.  “Willie  Commelin  Scholten,”  Jaarver,  1912.  (30,  647) 

Whetzel,  H.  H. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui  283.  (24,  550) 

Black-Spot  Canker 

Carpenter,  J.  F. 

Brit.  Columbia  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  34  (1911).  (27,  448)  To  prevent  infection, 

apply  Bordeaux  or  lime  sulfur.  Keep  dry  and  free  from  injury. 

Brown  Rot  ( Monilia ) 

de  Istvanffi,  G. 

Bui.  Inst.  Cent.  Ampelol.  Roy.  Hongrois,  1 (1906),  29.  (21,  552) 

Chlorosis 

Riviere,  G.,  and  Bailhache,  G. 

Jour.  Soc.  Nat.  Hort.  France,  4 ser.,  14  (1913),  287.  (30,  749)  Iron  sulfate 
gives  favorable  results,  due  probably  to  the  metallic  component  of  this  salt. 
(Anon.) 

Bol.  Quind.  Soc.  Agr.  Ital.,  16  (1911),  16,  595;  abs.  in  Mitt.  Deut.  Landw. 
Gesell.,  26  (1911),  42,  582.  (26,  749) 

Crown  Gall  ( Pseudomonas ) 

Phillips,  J.  L. 

Rpt.  State  Ent.  and  Plant  Path.  Va.,  7 (1908-09),  56.  (23,  149) 


Fire  Blight  ( Bacillus ) 


Jones,  D.  H. 

Ontario  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  176.  (23,  49) 

Stewart,  V.  B. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  329.  (29,  348)  Eradicate  holdover  blight, 

remove  quince  blossom  buds,  and  inspect  diseased  areas  often. 


N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Circ.  20.  (29,  551) 

Whetzel,  H.  H.,  and  Stewart,  V.  B. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  272.  (22,  747) 

Hypochnose  ( Hypochnus ) 
Stevens,  F.  L.,  and  Hall,  J.  G. 

Ann.  Mycol.,  7 (1909),  1,  49.  (21,  244) 


Mushroom  Root  Rot  ( Armillaria ) 

Barss,  H.  P. 

Ore.  Countryman,  6 (1913),  3,  113.  (30,  649)  Remove  and  destroy  affected 
and  dead  roots;  disinfect  with  Bordeaux,  lime  sulfur,  or  corrosive  sublimate 
and  treat  exposed  surfaces  with  tree  paint  or  grafting  wax. 


Scab  ( Venturia ) 


Huber,  K. 

Deut.  Obstbau  Ztg.,  1908,  23-24,  382.  (21,  54) 


Bordeaux  recommended. 


TRUCK  CROPS 

Diseases,  General 

Collinge,  W.  E. 

Rpt.  Econ.  Biol.,  2 (1912),  41.  (26,  445) 

Eastham,  J.  W.,  and  Howitt,  J.  E. 

Ontario  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  171.  (21,  342) 

Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1908,  64.  (21,  343) 

Giddings,  N.  J. 

W.  Va.  Sta.  Bui.  123.  (23,  46) 

Harter,  L.  L. 

Va.  Truck  Sta.  Bui.  1.  (22,  147) 

Kirch  ner,  O. 

Wiirttemb.  Wchnbl.  Landw.,  1913,  29,  439;  30,  455.  (29,  845) 

Muller,  H.  C.,  Stormer,  K.,  et  al. 

Ber.  Agr.  Chem.  Kontroll  u.  Vers.  Stat.  Pflanzenkrank.  Prov.  Sachsen,  1910, 
71.  (26,  142) 

Muller,  H.  C.,  Molz,  E.,  and  Morgenthaler,  D. 

Ber.  Agr.  Chem.  Kontroll  u.  Vers.  Stat.  Pflanzenkrank.  Prov.  Sachsen,  1912, 
67.  (30,  148) 

Sackett,  W.  G. 

Colo.  Sta.  Bui.  138.  (21,  145) 


72 


Selby,  A.  D. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Columbus  Hort.  Soc.,  1910,  13.  (28,  148) 

Tompson,  H.  C. 

Miss.  Sta.  Bui.  141.  (24,  45) 

Westerdijk,  Johanna 

Phytopath.  Lab.  “Willie  Commelin  Scholten,”  Jaarver,  1911.  (30,  647) 


Phytopath.  Lab.  “Willie  Commelin  Scholten,”  Jaarver,  1912.  (30.  647) 

Whetzel,  H.  H. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  283.  (24,  550) 

(Anon.) 

Wis.  Sta.  Bui.  228.  (28,  844) 


Club  Root  ( Plasmodiophora ) 

van  Poeteren,  N. 

Tijdschr.  Plantenziekten,  17  (1911),  4-6,  150.  (26,  447) 

Wagner,  J.  P. 

Mitt.  Deut.  Landw.  Gesell.,  24  (1909),  41,  610.  (23,  250) 


Gifford,  C.  M. 

Vt.  Sta.  Bui.  157. 


Damping-off  ( Fusarium ) 
(26,  57) 


73 


FUNGICIDES 

ADHERENTS,  GENERAL 

Astruc,  H. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  TEst-Centre),  34  (1913),  24,  746;  25,  780.  (29,  554) 

Fonzes-Diacon,  H. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  TEst-Centre),  34  (1913),  11,  331  (29,  157) 

Lecomte,  A. 

Rev.  Vit.,  40  (1913),  1027,  225.  (30,  248) 

Vermorel,  V.,  and  Dantony,  E. 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  154  (1912),  20,  1300-1302.  (27,  548) 


Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  156  (1913),  19,  1475;  Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit 
(Ed.  TEst-Centre),  34  (1913),  21,  657.  (29,  451) 


Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  TEst-Centre),  34  (1913),  25,  778.  (30,  153) 

Weinmann,  J. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  TEst-Centre),  33  (1912),  23,  709.  (27,  753) 


Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  TEst-Centre),  33  (1912),  29,  85.  (28,  154) 

PREPARATION  AND  APPLICATION,  GENERAL 

Chandler,  W.  H. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Mo.  Bd.  Hort.,  2 (1908),  314.  (22,  152) 

Chappaz,  G. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  TEst-Centre),  34  (1913),  16,  487.  (29,  554) 

Cook,  M.  T. 

The  Diseases  of  Tropical  Plants,  1913,  11.  (31,  241) 

Hollrung,  M. 

Die  Mittel  zur  Bekampfung  der  Pflanzenkrankheiten,  Berlin,  1914,  2 ed., 
rev.  and  enl.,  8.  (31,  745) 

McCallum,  W.  B. 

Ariz.  Sta-.  Bui.  60.  (22,  53) 

McCue,  C.  A. 

Del.  Sta.  Bui.  98.  (28,  449) 

van  Hall-de  Jonge,  A.  E. 

Dept.  Landb.  Suriname  Bui.  22.  (22,  549) 

Vermorel,  V.,  and  Dantony,  E. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  TEst-Centre),  34  (1913),  24,  745.  (30,  153) 

Notes  sur  les  Preparations  Insecticides,  Fongicides  et  Bouillies  Mouillantes, 
Montpellier  and  Villefranche,  1914.  (31,  153) 

Vivarelli,  L. 

Rivista  (Conegliano),  4 ser.,  16  (1910),  11,  249;  12,  277;  13,  296.  (23,  747) 

Whetzel,  H.  H. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Circ.  2.  (20,  551) 


7 4 


(Anon.) 

Insect  Pest  and  Plant  Disease  Bur.  Nebr.  Bui.  1.  (21,  645) 

BORDEAUX 

Preparation  and  Application — 

McAlpine,  D. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  8 (1910),  2,  728.  (24,  555) 

O’Gara,  P.  J. 

Rogue  River  Fruit  Grower,  1 (1909),  7,  1.  (22,  249) 

Quanjer,  H.  M. 

Tijdschr.  Plantenziekten,  16  (1910),  1-2,  16.  (23,  355) 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  16  (1910),  10,  793.  (22,  653) 

van  der  Zande,  K.  H.  M.,  and  Lagers,  G.  H.  G. 

Tijdschr.  Plantenziekten,  16  (1910),  1-2,  32.  (23,  356) 

Vermorel,  V.,  and  Dantony,  E. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  34  (1913),  24,  745.  (30,  153) 

Chemistry — 

Barker,  B.  T.  P.,  and  Gimingham,  C.  T. 

Jour.  Agr.  Sci.,  4 (1911),  1,  76.  (25,  458) 

Bell,  J.  M.,  and  Taber,  W.  C. 

Jour.  Phys.  Chem.,  11  (1907),  8,  632.  (22,  456) 

Gimingham,  C.  T. 

Chem.  World,  1 (1912),  11,  363.  (28,  552) 

Kolliker,  A. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  19  (1909),  7,  385.  (22,  549) 

Pickering,  S.  U. 

Jour.  Agr.  Sci.,  3 (1909),  2,  171.  (22,  455) 

Adhesive  and  Spreading  Qualities — 

Lutman,  B.  F. 

Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  1,  32.  (27,  154) 

Marescalchi,  A. 

Coltivatore,  55  (1909),  17,  531.  (22,  454)  . 

Injury  Resulting — 

Dandeno,  J.  B. 

Rpt.  Mich.  Acad.  Sci.,  11  (1909),  30.  (23,  252) 

Groth,  B.  H.  A. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Bui.  232.  (24,  156) 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  17  (1910),  2,  103.  (23,  554) 

Scott,  W.  M. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  54.  (23,  51) 

Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  pt.  2,  46.  (24,  253) 


75 


Compared  with  Other  Fungicides — 

Foglesong,  L.  E. 

Trans.  111.  Hort.  Soc.,  n.  ser.,  43  (1909),  365.  (23,  745) 

Pantanelli,  E. 

Staz.  Sper.  Agr.  Ital.,  46  (1913),  5,  329.  (31,  843) 

Scott,  W.  M. 

Va.  Sta.  Bui.  188.  (23,  352) 

Stewart,  F.  C.,  and  French,  G.  T. 

Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  1,  45.  (27,  151) 

Watkins,  O.  S. 

Address  55th  Annual  Convention  111.  State  Hort.  Soc.  (Kinmundy)  1911. 
(25,  146) 

Miscellaneous — 

Crandall,  C.  S. 

111.  Sta.  Bui.  135.  (21,  547) 

Dandeno,  J.  B. 

Rpt.  Mich.  Acad.  Sci.,  10  (1908),  58.  (21,  340) 

Hawkins,  L.  A. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  35  (1914),  3,  72;  5,  142;  7,  210.  (31.  50) 
Jones,  L.  R.,  and  Giddings,  N.  J. 

Vt.  Sta.  Bui.  142.  (21,  549) 

Kirch ner,  O. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  18  (1908),  2,  65.  (21,  147) 

Rorer,  J.  B. 

Bui.  Dept.  Agr.  Trinidad,  9 (1910),  64,  10.  (23,  455) 

Stewart,  F.  C.,  et  al. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  323.  (23,  449) 

COPPER  FUNGICIDES  OTHER  THAN  BORDEAUX 
Preparation  and  Application — 

Chappaz,  G. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  33  (1912),  12,  353.  (27,  254) 

SCHERPE,  R. 

Min.  Bl.  K.  Preuss.  Verwalt.  Landw.,  Domanen  u.  Forsten,  8 (1912),  7,  219 
(28,  247) 

Sharples,  A. 

Agr.  Bui.  Fed.  Malay  States,  1 (1913),  11,  392.  (29,  651) 

Chemistry — 

Campbell,  C. 

Riv.  Patol.  Veg.,  6 (1912),  15,  225.  (28,  552) 

Adhesive  and  Spreading  Qualities — 

Dejeanne,  A. 

Rev.  Vit.,  33  (1910),  863,  701.  (24,  51) 


76 


Injury  Resulting — 

Ewert,  R. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank..  22  (1912),  5,  257.  (28,  247) 

D’Ippolito,  G. 

Staz.  Sper.  Agr.  Ital.,  43  (1910),  10,  735.  (25,  548) 

(Anon.) 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  19  (1912),  9,  751.  (28,  648) 

Compared  with  Other  Fungicides — 

Biusine 

Engrais,  24  (1910),  13,  355.  (21,  54) 

Chuard,  E. 

Terre  Vaud.,  2 (1910),  18,  205.  (23,  453) 

Marescalchi,  A. 

Coltivatore,  55  (1909),  17,  531.  (22,454) 

Perrin,  G. 

Bui.  Soc.  Nat.  Agr.  France,  69  (1909),  10,  890.  (23,  253) 

Miscellaneous — 

de  Jaczewski,  A. 

1 Cong.  Internat.  Pathol.  Camparee  (Paris),  1912,  2,  Comp.  Rend.,  948. 
(31,  841) 

Malvezin,  P. 

Bui.  Soc.  Chim.  France,  4 ser.,  5 (1909),  23,  1096.  (22,  457) 

Vermorel,  V.,  and  Dantony,  E. 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  152  (1911),  19,  1263.  (25,  459) 

LIME  SULFUR 
Preparation  and  Application — 

Burgess,  W.  B. 

Jour.  Southeast  Agr.  Col.  Wye,  1910,  19,  61.  (25,  755) 

Manaresi,  A. 

Agr.  Mod.  (Milan),  19  (1913),  23,  271.  (31,  749) 

McAlpine,  D. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  8 (1910),  2,  728.  (24,  555) 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  17  (1910),  3,  184.  (23,  655) 

Stewart,  J.  P. 

Proc.  State  Hort.  Soc.  Pa.,  52  (1911),  176.  (25,  353) 

Injury  Resulting — 

Safro,  V.  I. 

Ore.  Sta.  Research  Bui.  2.  (30,  152) 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  17  (1911),  11,  881.  (24,  745) 

Wallace,  E. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  288.  (25,  47) 


77 


Compared  with  Other  Fungicides — 

Foglesong,  L.  E. 

Trans.  111.  Hort.  Soc.,  n.  ser.,  43  (1909),  365.  (23,  745) 

Pantanelli,  E. 

Staz.  Sper.  Agr.  Ital.,  46  (1913),  5,  329.  (31,  843) 

Scott,  W.  M. 

Address  55th  Annual  Convention  111.  State  Hort.  Soc.  (Kinmundy),  1911. 
(25,  147) 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  54.  (23,  51) 


Va.  Sta.  Bui.  188.  (23,  352) 

Stewart,  F.  C.,  and  French,  G.  T. 

Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  1,  45.  (27,  151) 

Tetzner 

Deut.  Obstbau  Ztg.,  1910,  14,  179.  (23,  554) 

Wallace,  E. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  289.  (25,  48) 

Watkins,  O.  S. 

Address  55th  Annual  Convention  111.  State  Hort.  Soc.  (Kinmundy)  1911. 
(25,  146) 

Miscellaneous — 

American  Pomological  Society 

Proc.  Amer.  Pomol.  Soc.,  1909,  112.  (24,  653) 

Cadoret,  A. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  33  (1912),  49,  716.  (28,  652) 

Clinton,  G.  P.,  and  Britton,  W.  E. 

Conn.  State  Sta.  Rpt  1909-10,  pt.  7,  583.  (24,  553) 

Savastano,  L. 

Bol.  Arbor.  Ital.,  7 (1911),  3-4,  193.  (28,  247) 

R.  Staz.  Sper.  Agrum.  e Fruitticol.  Acireale,  Bol.  5 (1912).  (27,  253) 

Scott,  W.  M. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  27.  (21,  149) 

Shutt,  F.  T. 

Canada  Expt.  Farms  Rpts.  1907,  165.  (21,  341) 

Wallace,  E.,  Blodgett,  F.  M.,  and  Hesler,  L.  R. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  290. 

Whetzel,  H.  H. 

Reprint  from  Proc.  N.  Y.  State  Fruit  Growers’  Assoc.,  9 (1910),  31 
(23,  655) 


SOIL  DISINFECTANTS 


Bell  air,  G. 

Rev.  Hort.  (Paris),  81  (1909),  23,  555.  (22,  549) 


78 


Gilchrist,  D.  A. 

County  Northumb.  Ed.  Com.  Bui.  21  (1914),  84.  (31,  842)  See  also  Exp 

Sta.  Rec.,  29,  752. 

Hartley,  C. 

Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  2,  99.  (27,  655) 

Johnson,  J. 

Wis.  Sta.  Research  Bui.  31  (1914).  (30,  846) 

Rolet,  A. 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  n.  ser,  27  (1914),  3,  89.  (31,  248) 

Winston,  J.  R. 

Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  1,  74.  (29,  645) 

SULFUR 

Juritz,  C.  F. 

Agr.  Jour.  Cape  Good  Hope,  33  (1908),  6,  719.  (20,  951) 

Marcille,  R. 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  152  (1911),  12,  780.  (25,  351) 

(Anon.) 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  21  (1914),  3,  236;  noted  in  Agr.  News  (Barbados), 
13  (1914),  320,  254.  (31,  846) 


A Bibliography  of 
Non-Parasitic  Diseases 
of  Plants 


BY 


Cyrus  W.  Lantz 


Preface 


The  aim  in  the  preparation  of  this  bibliography  is  merely  to  present  a list 
of  non-parasitic  diseases  of  plants  with  reference  to  the  more  important  litera- 
ture on  these  diseases.  The  list  includes  those  diseases  in  which  no  parasites 
have  been  found  and  some  diseases — e.  g.,  gummosis — in  which  there  is  some 
question  as  to  whether  the  cause  is  or  is  not  a parasite. 

The  diseases  are  listed  under  the  common  names  of  the  plants  upon  which 
they  occur,  and  the  names  of  these  plants  are  arranged  alphabetically.  Where 
a disease  occurs  upon  several  different  plants, — e.  g.,  chlorosis,  mosaic, — it  is 
also  given  a separate  heading,  and  placed  in  its  alphabetical  position.  Plant 
injuries  are  also  arranged  in  this  way. 

Owing  to  the  confusion  in  the  naming  of  some  of  the  so-called  physiologi- 
cal diseases  and  to  the  lack  of  definite  knowledge  concerning  them,  it  is  probable 
that  the  same  disease  in  some  instances  occurs  under  two  different  names;  how- 
ever, it  seems  better  to  err  in  this  way  than  to  risk  the  grouping  together  of 
distinct  diseases  as  one.  The  names  here  used  for  the  diseases  are  those  found 
in  the  original  publication. 

This  list  of  diseases  and  literature  is  complete  up  to  and  including  the  year 
1914  in  so  far  as  it  has  been  possible  to  make  it.  Free  use  has  been  made  of 
a bibliography  of  non-parasitic  diseases  of  plants  published  by  Dr.  George  E. 
Stone  in  the  17th  Annual  Report  (1905)  of  the  Hatch  Experiment  Station  of 
Massachusetts  and  of  the  reviews  in  the  Experiment  Station  Record. 


A BIBLIOGRAPHY  OF  NON-PARASITIC 
DISEASES  OF  PLANTS 


By  CYRUS  W.  LANTZ,  Assistant  in  Botany 


APPLE 

Baldwin  Fruit  Spot 

Sturgis,  W.  C. 

Conn.  Sta.  Rpt.,  21  (1897),  171. 

(See  also  Fruit  Spot.) 

Bitter  Pit 

Evans,  I.  B.  P. 

Transvaal  Dept.  Agr.  Tech.  Bui.  1 (1910),  18. 


Union  South  Africa  Tech.  Bui.  2 (1911),  1-18. 
Ewart,  A.  J. 

Proc.  Roy.  Soc.  Victoria,  n.  ser,  24  (1911),  2,  367-419. 
Farmer,  J.  B. 

Roy.  Bot.  Gard.  Kew,  Bui.  Misc.  Inform.,  1907,  6,  250. 
Lounsbury,  C.  P. 

Agr.  Jour.  Cape  Good  Hope,  37  (1910),  2,  150-173. 
McAlpine,  D. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  8 (1910),  4,  201-202. 

Jour.  New  Zeal.  Dept.  Agr.,  5 (1912),  2,  139. 


Prog.  Rpt.  Bitter  Pit  Invest.  (Australia),  1 (1911-12),  197;  abs.  in  Bot 
Centbl.,  122  (1913),  18,  431. 

Quinn,  G. 

Jour.  Agr.  and  Indus.  So.  Aust,  8 (1905),  6,  305-309. 

White,  J. 

Proc.  Roy.  Soc.  Victoria  (reprint),  n.  ser.,  24  (1911),  1,  19. 


Collar  Blight 


Waite,  M.  B. 

Rpt.  W.  Va.  Bd.  Agr,  1912,  25,  66-74. 


Frost  Injury 

Jones,  L.  R. 

Vt.  Sta.  Bui.  .49  (1895). 

Stewart,  F.  C. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  220  (1902). 

(81) 


82 


Fruit  Spot 

Brooks,  C. 

N.  H.  Sta.  Sci.  Contrib.  2,  423-456;  Bui.  Torrey  Bot.  Club,  35  (1908),  9, 
423-456. 


Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  4,  249-250. 

Jones,  L.  R.,  and  Orton,  W.  A. 

Vt.  Sta.  Rpt.  1899,  159-164. 

Scott,  W.  M. 

Phytopath.,  1 (1911),  1,  32-34. 

Stakman,  E.  C.,  and  Rose,  R.  C. 

Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  4,  333-335. 

Stewart,  F.  C. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  164  (1899). 
WORTMAN,  J. 

Landw.  Jahrb.,  21  (1892),  663-675. 

(See  also  Jonathan  Fruit  Spot.) 

Jonathan  Fruit  Spot 

Beach  and  Clark 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  248  (1904). 

Cook,  M.  T.,  and  Martin,  G.  W. 

Phytopath,  4 (1914),  2,  102-103. 


Phytopath,  3 (1913),  2,  119-120. 

Norton,  J.  B.  S. 

Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  2,  99-100. 

Scott,  W.  M,  and  Roberts,  J.  W. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  112  (1913). 
(See  also  Fruit  Spot.) 

Rosette 

( ) 

Colo.  Sta.  Bui.  69  (1902).  • 


Jones,  L.  R. 

Vt.  Sta.  Rpt.  1896-97,  55-59. 


Scald 


Spray  Injury 

Eustace,  H.  J. 

Science,  n.  ser,  21  (1905),  548,  994-995. 
Morse,  W.  J. 

Me.  Sta.  Bui.  223  (1914). 

•Stewart,  F.  C,  and  Eustace,  H.  J. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  220  (1902) 
Swingle,  D.  B,  and  Morris,  H.  E. 

Phytopath,  1 (1911),  3,  79-93. 


83 


Waite,  M.  B. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  58  (1910). 

Water  Core 

Bothe,  R. 

Deut.  Obstbau  Ztg.,  1912,  1,  16;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  35  (1912) 
20-24,  544. 

Norton,  J.  B.  S. 

Phytopath.,  1 (1911),  4,  126-128. 

O’Gara,  P.  J. 

Off.  Path.  Rogue  River  Valley  (Ore.)  Bui.  9 (1912),  8. 


Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  2.  121-128. 

Reiche,  H. 

Deut.  Obstbau  Ztg.,  1912,  1,  16-17;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  35  (1912) 
20-40,  544. 


APRICOT 


Leaf  Scorch,  or  Sunburn 

Toumey,  J.  W 

Ariz.  Sta  Rpt.  1898,  163-165 

ASTER  (China) 

Yellows 

Smith,  R.  E. 

Mass.  (Hatch)  Sta.  Bui.  79  (1902). 


BEET 

Curly  Top 

Arthur,  J.  C. 

Proc.  Amer.  Assoc.  Adv.  Sci.,  38  (1899),  280. 

and  Golden,  Katherine 

Proc.  Ind.  Acad.  Sci.,  1891,  92. 

Ball,  E.  D. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Ent.  Bui.  66  (1909),  pt.  4. 
Bunzel,  H.  H. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  277  (1913). 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  238  (1912). 


Biochem.  Ztschr.,  50  (1913),  3-4,  185-208. 

Cunningham,  Clara  A. 

Bot.  Gaz.,  28  (1899),  177-191. 

Lapham,  M.  H.,  and  Heilmann,  W.  H. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Soil  Survey  of  Lower  Salinas  Valley,  Cal.,  1901,  56. 
Shaw,  H.  B. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  181  (1910). 


84 


Townsend,  C.  O. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  122  (1908). 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Rpt.  72  (1902),  93-95. 

Heart  Rot 

Busse,  W.  R.,  and  Ulrich,  P. 

Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  1909,  8,  24-25. 
Kruger,  W. 

Bl.  Zuckerrubenbau,  16  (1909),  24,  369-373. 


Leaf  Scorch 

Stewart,  F.  C. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  162  (1899). 

Tumor 

Reinelt,  J. 

Bl.  Zuckerrubenbau,  16  (1909),  21,  328-330;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt., 
26  (1910),  16-17,  479. 


Bl.  Zuckerrubenbau,  16  (1909),  5,  68-73;  6,  81-87. 

Spisar,  K. 

Ztschr.  Zuckerindus.  Bohmen,  34  (1910),  11,  629-634. 

CASSAVA 

Leaf  Curl 

Zimmerman,  A. 

Pflanzer.,  2 (1906),  10,  145;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  18  (1907),  10-12, 
366-367. 


CAULIFLOWER 

Leaf  Scorch 

Stewart,  F.  C. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  162  (1899). 

CELERY 

Pithiness 

Austin,  C.  F.,  and  White,  T.  W. 

Md.  Sta.  Bui.  93  (1904). 

Garcia,  F. 

N.  Mex.  Sta.  Rpt.  1904,  27. 

Sandsten,  E.  P.,  and  White,  T.  W. 

Md.  Sta.  Bui.  83  (1902). 


CEREAL 


General 


Riehm,  E. 

Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  39  (1913),  4-7,  81-107. 


Brusone  and  Blight  of  Rice 


Brizi,  U. 

Ann.  1st.  Agr.  (Milan),  7 (1905-06),  107-174. 


Ann.  1st.  Agr.  (Milan),  5 (1901-04),  77-95. 


Agr.  Mod.,  11  (1905),  380,  394,  452;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  15  (1906), 
21,  653-654. 

D’ Almeida,  J.  V. 

Rev.  Agron.  (Portugal),  5 (1907),  8,  242-247. 

Farneti,  R. 

Atti  Cong.  Risicolo  Internat.,  3 (1906),  79-101. 

Hewitt,  J.  L. 

Ark.  Sta.  Bui.  110  (1912). 


Foot  Disease 

Robert,  E. 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  n.  ser..  26  (1913),  49,  715-716. 

Frost  Injury 

Sorauer,  P. 

Landw.  Jahrb.,  32  (1903),  1,  1-68. 

Zimmerman,  H. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  23  (1913),  6,  332-334. 

Yellows  of  Oats 


Clausen,  H. 

Mitt.  Deut.  Landw.  Gesell.,  25  (1910),  44,  631-639. 


Zapal 

Vassiliev,  T. 

Khoziaistvo.,  7 (1912),  26,  864-872;  27,  903-909;  abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr. 
(Rome),  Bui.  Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant  Diseases,  3 (1912),  10,  2301-2303. 
(See  also  Smoke.) 


CHERRY 

Leaf  Scorch 

Barss,  H.  P. 

Ore.  Sta.  Bien.  Crop  Pest  and  Hort.  Rpt.  1911-12,  198-217. 


Gummosis 

Mikosch,  K. 

Sitzber.  K.  Akad.  Wiss.  (Vienna),  Math.  Naturw.  Kl.,  115  (1906),  6,  911-961 
Sorauer,  P. 

Landw.  Jahrb.,  39  (1910),  2,  259-298. 


Landw.  Jahrb.,  42  (1912),  5,  719-750. 
(See  also  Cauliflower.) 


86 


CHLOROSIS 

General 

Baur,  E. 

Ber.  Deut.  Bot.  Gesell.,  26a  (1908),  9,  711-713. 

Dementjew,  A. 

Ann.  Sci.  Agron.,  2 ser.,  2 (1904),  1,  63-81. 

Hasselbring,  H. 

Bot.  Gaz.,  41  (1906),  361. 

Hoc,  P. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed  l’Est-Centre),  33  (1912),  36,  312-313. 

Maze,  P.,  Ruot,  M.,  and  Lemoigne,  M. 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  155  (1912),  7,  435-437;  abs.  in  Chem. 
Centbl.,  2 (1912),  17,  1490. 


Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  157  (1913),  12,  495-498. 
Provost-Dumarchais,  G. 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  n.  ser.,  22  (1911),  46,  616-617 
Riviere,  G.,  and  Bailhache,  G. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  31  (1910),  15,  453-454. 

Jour.  Soc.  Nat.  Hort.  France,  4 ser.,  14  (1913),  287-288. 

Verneuil,  A.,  and  Lafond,  R. 

Rev.  Vit.,  36  (1911),  927,  321-326. 

(See  also  Citrus  Fruits,  Grape,  Maize,  Mallow,  Pear,  and  Sugar  Cane.) 

CITRUS  FRUITS 

General 

Rolfs,  P.  H.,  Fawcett,  H.  S.,  and  Floyd,  B.  F. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  108  (1911). 

Swingle,  W.  T.,  and  Webber,  H.  J. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Phys.  and  Path.  Bui.  8 (1896). 


Hume,  H.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  53  (1900). 


Blight 


Brown  Spot  of  Orange 


Coit,  J.  E. 

Cal.  Cult.,  37  (1911),  3,  51-52. 


Chlorosis 

Averna-Sacca,  R. 

Bol.  Agr.  (Sao  Paulo),  13  ser.,  1912,  2,  129-150. 
Floyd,  B.  F. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  68. 


87 


Lipman,  C.  B.f  and  Snowden,  R.  R. 

Pacific  Rural  Press,  81  (1911),  21,  412;  24,  472-473. 

Collar  Rot 

Fuller,  C. 

Agr.  Jour,  and  Misc.  Rec.,  6 (1903),  5,  150-151. 

Dieback,  or  Exanthema 

Brittlebank,  C.  C. 

Jour.  Dept.  Agr.  Victoria,  10  (1912),  7,  401-404. 
Butler,  O. 

Ann.  Bot.,  25  (1911),  97,  141. 

Essig,  E.  O. 

Pomona  Col.  Jour.  Econ.  Bot.,  1 (1911),  2,  73-82. 
Floyd,  B.  F. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1912,  102. 


Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1910,  56-68. 

Hume,  H.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  53  (1900). 

Lipman,  C.  B. 

Science,  n.  ser.,  39  (1914),  1011,  728-730. 

Mills,  J.  W. 

Cal.  Sta.  Bui.  138  (1902). 

Gummosis,  Foot  Rot,  Mai  di  Gomma 

Bertoni,  M.  S. 

Agronomia  (Puerto  Bertoni),  5 (1911),  2,  77-89. 


Agronomia  (Puerto  Bertoni),  5 (1913),  3-4,  93-97. 
Call,  A.  F. 

Proc.  Fruit  Growers’  Conv.  Cal.,  37  (1910),  66-71. 
Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Mo.  Bui.  Com  Hort.  Cal.,  1 (1912),  5,  147-156. 


Abs.  in  Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  1,  54. 

— and  Burger,  O.  F. 

Mycol.,  3 (1911),  3,  151-153. 

Floyd,  B.  F. 

Abs.  in  Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  1,  53. 
Hume,  H.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  53  (1900). 

Mills,  J.  W. 

Cal.  Sta.  Bui.  138  (1902). 
Savastano,  L.,  and  Majmone,  B. 

Bol.  Arbor.  Ital.,  5 (1909),  2,  68-73. 


88 


Melanose 


Floyd,  B.  F. 

Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1910,  56-68. 

and  Stevens,  H.  E. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  Ill  (1912). 

Hume,  H.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  53  (1900). 


Splitting  of  Oranges 


Savastano,  L. 

Bol.  Arbor.  Ital.,  5 (1909),  2,  83-87. 


Yellow  Spotting 


Floyd,  B.  F. 

Proc.  Fla.  State  Hort.  Soc.,  22  (1909),  88-93. 


Fla.  Sta.  Rpt.  1910,  56-68. 

Thomas,  E.  E. 

Cal.  Sta.  Circ.  85  (1912). 

COTTON 

General 

Atkinson,  G.  F. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  33  (1896). 

Hibbard,  R.  P. 

Miss.  Sta.  Buis.  140  (1910),  MOB  (1910). 

i 

Brunissure 

Maige,  A.,  and  Nicolas,  G. 

Bui.  Soc.  Hist.  Nat.  Afrique  Nord.,  2 (1910),  4,  65-68. 


Curly  Leaf 


Kranzlin,  G. 

Pflanzer,  6 (1910),  9-10,  129-145;  11-12,  161-170. 


Pflanzer,  7 (1911),  6,  327-329. 

Thiele,  R. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  23  (1913),  4,  198-201. 


Atkinson,  G.  F. 

Ala.  Sta.  Bui.  36  (1892). 


Red  Leaf  Blight 


Rust 

Atkinson,  G.  F. 

Ala.  Sta.  Bui.  27  (1891). 

Duggar,  J.  F. 

Ala.  Sta.  Buis.  76,  78,  89,  101,  102. 
Earle,  F.  S. 

Ala.  Sta.  Bui.  99  (1898). 


Shedding  of  Bolls 


Hibbard,  R.  P. 

Miss.  Sta.  Buis.  140  (1910),  140B  (1910). 


Tomosis 


Cook,  O.  F. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  120. 


Atkinson,  G.  F. 

Ala.  Sta.  Bui.  36  (1892). 


Yellow  Leaf  Blight 


CRANBERRY 


Blossom  Blight 


Shear,  C.  L. 

Proc.  Wis.  Cranberry  Growers’  Assoc..  22  (1909),  4-7. 


CUCUMBER 


Leaf  Curl 


Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  (Hatch)  Sta.  Bui.  87  (1903). 


Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  pt.  1,  163. 


Mosaic 


Stem  Curl 

Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  (Hatch)  Sta.  Bui.  87  (1903). 

Wilt 

Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  (Hatch)  Sta.  Bui.  87  (1903). 


DAFFODIL 

Yellow  Stripe 

Darlington,  H.  R. 

Tour.  Roy.  Hort.  Soc.  (London),  34  (1908),  2,  161-166. 

ELECTRICAL  INJURY 

General 

Cromie,  G.  A. 

Sci.  Amer.  Sup.,  77  (1914),  1985,  36-37. 

McDougall,  D.  T. 

Jour.  N.  Y.  Bot.  Gard.,  3 (1902),  31,  131-135. 

Start,  E.  A.,  Stone,  G.  E.,  and  Fernald,  H.  T. 

Mass.  Sta.  Bui.  125  (1908). 

Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  Sta.  Bui.  91  (1903). 


90 


Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1904,  7-34. 

and  Chapman,  G.  H. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1911,  pt.  1,  144-176. 

Wolff,  F. 

Naturvv.  Ztschr.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  5 (1907),  9,  425-471. 

FROST  INJURY 

General 

Blackman,  F.  F. 

New  Phytol  , 8 (1909),  9-10,  354-363. 

Blake,  M.  A.,  and  Farley,  A.  J. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Rpt.  1912,  78-85. 

Butters,  F.  K.,  and  Rosendahl,  C.  O. 

Minn.  Bot.  Studies,  4 (1911),  pt.  2,  153-159. 


Science,  n.  ser,  33  (1911),  842,  261. 

Chittenden,  F.  J. 

Jour.  Roy.  Hort.  Soc.  (London),  36  (1910),  2,  358-404. 

Clement,  F.  M. 

Ann.  Rpt.  Quebec  Soc.  Protect.  Plants,  5 (1912-13),  24-26. 

Crandall,  C.  S. 

Colo.  Sta.  Bui.  41  (1898). 

Elwes,  H.  J. 

Quart.  Jour.  Forestry,  1 (1907),  2,  169-179. 

Frazer,  C. 

Country  Gentleman,  79  (1914),  8,  360-392. 

Friedrich,  J. 

Centbl.  Gesam.  Forstw.,  33  (1907),  5,  185-192. 

Hartley,  C.  P. 

Forest.  Club  Ann.  (Univ.  Nebr.),  4 (1912),  39-50. 

Hedgecock,  G.  G. 

Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  2,  111-114. 

Torreya,  12  (1912),  2,  25-30. 

Lustner,  G. 

Deut.  Obstbau  Ztg,  1911,  4,  233-236. 

Massee,  G. 

Roy.  Bot.  Gard.  Kew,  Bui.  Misc.  Inform.,  1909,  2,  53-55. 

Maximow,  N.  A. 

Jahrb.  Wis.  Bot.  (Pringsheim),  53  (1914),  3,  327-420. 

Molisch,  H. 

Schr.  Ver.  Naturw.  Kenntnisse  Wien,  51  (1910-11),  141-176;  abs.  in  Bot. 
Centbl..  119  (1912),  16,  404-405. 

Noack,  F. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  15  (1905),  1,  29-43. 


9i 


Ohlweiler,  W.  W. 

Mo.  Bot.  Gard.  Ann.  Rpt.,  23  (19120,  101-131. 

SOLEREDER,  H. 

Centbl.  Bakt..  2 Abt.,  12  (1904),  6-8,  253-262. 
Sorauer,  P. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  12  (1902),  44-47. 


Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  24  (1914),  2,  65-76. 


Naturwissenschaften,  1 (1913),  44,  1055-1058;  45,  1094-1097. 
Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1911,  pt.  1,  110-114. 

and  Monahan,  N.  F. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1904,  7-34. 
von  Schrenk,  H. 

Mo.  Bot.  Gard.  Ann.  Rpt.,  18  (1907),  81-83. 


Mo.  Bot.  Gard.  Ann.  Rpt.,  16  (1905),  117-120. 

Waldron,  C.  B. 

N.  D.  Sta.  Rpt.  1910,  49-51. 

(See  also  Apple,  Cereal,  Gummosis,  Pear,  Plum,  and  Quince.) 

GRAPE 

General 

Bioletti,  F.  T. 

Pacific  Rural  Press,  78  (1909),  1,  5. 

Butler,  O. 

Cal.  Sta.  Bui.  168  (1905). 

Linsbauer,  L. 

Jahresber.  Ver.  Angew.  Bot.,  7 (1909),  112-118. 

Anaheim,  or  California  Vine  Disease 

Butler,  O. 

Mem.  Torrey  Bot.  Club,  14  (1910),  2,  111-153. 

Hoops,  H. 

How  to  make  grape  culture  profitable  in  California,  Wrights,  Cal.,  Author, 
1904,  3-8. 

Lounsbury,  C.  P. 

Agr.  Jour.  Cape  Good  Hope,  18  (1901),  2,  90-94. 

Pierce,  N.  B. 

Pacific  Rural  Press,  69  (1905),  5,  78. 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Farmers’  Bui.  30  (1895). 
Woods,  A.  F. 

Abs.  in  Science,  n.  ser.,  13  (1901),  320,  247-248. 


92 


Brunissure 

Degrully,  L. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  24  (1903),  15,  449-452. 

Ducomet,  V. 

Assoc.  Franc.  Avanc.  Sci.,  32  (1904),  697-707;  abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl.,  98 
(1905),  4,  96-97. 

Ravaz,  L. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  25  (1904),  3,  69-72;  19,  568-569. 


Ann.  Rcole  Nat.  Agr.  Montpellier,  n.  ser.,  3 (1903),  2,  145-156;  3,  175-251. 

and  Sicard,  L. 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  Paris,  136  (1903),  21,  1276-1278. 

Chlorosis 

Bernatsky,  J. 

Bui.  Inst.  Cent.  Ampelol.  Roy.  Hongrois,  1 (1906),  8-9. 


Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  32  (1911),  32,  162-164. 
Chancrin,  E. 

Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  n.  ser..  23  (1912),  22,  683-686. 

Chauzit,  B. 

Rev.  Vit.,  15  (1901),  393,  718-719. 

Corso,  G. 

Ann.  R.  Staz.  Chim.  Agr.  Sper.  Roma,  2 ser.,  4 (1910),  129-142. 
Guillon,  J.  M.,  and  Brunand,  V. 

Rev.  Vit.,  20  (1903),  513,  437-441;  516,  532-535. 

Mottareale,  G. 

Bol.  R.  Scuola  Sup.  Agr.  Portici,  2 ser.,  1902,  6. 

Pierce,  N.  B. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Path.  Bui.  2 (1892). 

Ravaz,  L. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  34  (1913),  47,  641-652. 
Vernet,  L. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  25  (1904),  13,  385-386. 

Coulure 

Bioletti,  F.  T. 

Pacific  Rural  Press,  77  (1909),  22,  401. 

Lodeman,  E.  G. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta,  Bui.  76  (1894). 

Pierce,  N.  B. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Farmers’  Bui.  30  (1895). 

Court-noue 

Barry,  S. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  35  (1914),  5,  146-147. 


93 


Chappaz,  G. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  34  (1913),  18,  554-557. 

Faes,  H. 

Vie  Agr.  et  Rurale,  2 (1913),  27,  14-17. 

Jaccard,  P. 

Arch.  Sci.  Phys.  et  Nat.  (Geneva),  4 ser.,  28  (1909),  11,  519-521;  abs.  in 
Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt,  28  (1910),  9-11,  282-283. 

and  Burnat,  J. 

Rev.  Vit.,  37  (1912),  961,  665-668. 

Kober,  F. 

Abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  35  (1912),  20-24,  551. 


Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  34  (1913),  51,  779-781. 
Lamauraux 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  34  (1913),  40,  417-421. 
Ravaz,  L. 

Vie  Agr.  et  Rurale,  2 (1913),  27,  10-13. 


Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  34  (1913),  20,  616-624. 

Falling  of  Flowers 

Pantanelli,  E. 

Atti  R.  Accad.  Lincei,  Rend.  Cl.  Sci.  Fis.,  Mat.  e Nat.,  5 ser.,  18  (1909) 
1,  8,  406-411;  abs.  in  Jour.  Chem.  Soc.  (London),  96  (1909),  560,  II,  513. 

Malnero,  Rougeot,  Folletage 

Lodeman,  E.  G. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  76  (1894). 

Pierce,  N.  B. 

L.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Path.  Bui.  2 (1892). 

Ravaz,  L.,  and  Roos,  L. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  26  (1905),  39,  363-370;  40,  392-398. 


Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  141  (1905),  6,  366-367. 

Mosaic 

Pantanelli,  E. 

Malpighia,  24  (1912),  5-6,  497-523;  25  (1912),  1,  17-46. 


Pourriture 

Pierce,  N.  B. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Path.  Bui.  2 (1892). 

Roncet 

Averna-Sacca,  R. 

Atti  R.  1st.  Incorogg.  Napoli,  6 ser.,  62  (1910),  113-143. 

Mameli,  Eva 

Atti  R.  Accad.  Lincei,  Rend.  Cl.  Sci.  Fis.,  Mat.  e Nat.,  5 ser.,  22  (1913),  I, 
12,  879-883. 


94 


PA NTA NELLI,  E. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  23  (1913),  1,  1-34. 


Reprint  from  Vit.  Moderna,  17  (1911),  10-11;  Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  22 
(1912),  1,  1-38. 


Bol.  Min.  Agr.  Indus,  e Com.  (Rome),  ser.  C,  9 (1910),  2,  20-27. 


Atti  R.  Accad.  Lincei,  Rend.  Cl.  Sci.  Fis.,  Mat.  e Nat.,  5 ser.,  19  (1910),  I, 
7,  395-405. 


Bol.  Min.  Agr.  Indus,  e Com.  (Rome),  ser.  C,  11  (1912),  2-3,  1-10. 


Staz.  Sper.  Agr.  Ital.,  45  (1912),  4,  249-301. 


Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  23  (1913),  1,  1-34. 

Pavarino,  L. 

Riv.  Patol.  Veg.,  6 (1913),  6,  164-170;  7,  193-203. 

Petri,  L. 

Atti  R.  Accad.  Lincei,  Rend.  Cl.  Sci.  Fis.,  Mat.  e Nat.,  5 ser.,  21  (1912), 
I,  7,  505-511;  abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr.  (Rome),  Bui.  Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and 
Plant  Diseases,  3 (1912),  6,  1445. 


Atti  R.  Accad.  Lincei,  Rend.  Cl.  Sci.  Fis.,  Mat.  e Nat.,  5 ser.,  21  (1912), 
II,  1,  113-119;  abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr.  (Rome),  Bui.  Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and 
Plant  Diseases,  3 (1912),  9,  2091-2093. 


Atti  R.  Accad.  Lincei,  Rend.  Cl.  Sci.  Fis.,  Mat.  e Nat.,  5 ser.,  23  (1914), 
I,  3,  154-161. 

Spray  Injury 

Muth,  F. 

Jahresber.  Ver.  Angew.  Bot.,  9 (1911),  218-240. 


Mitt.  Deut.  Weinbau  Ver.,  1 (1906),  1,  9-18;  abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl.,  105 
(1907),  28.  26-27. 

Sun  Scald  and  Scorching 

Pacottet,  P. 

Rev.  Vit.,  32  (1909),  813,  57-60. 

Ravaz,  L. 

Prog.  Agr.  et  Vit.  (Ed.  l’Est-Centre),  34  (1913),  28,  33-35. 

GUMMOSIS 

General 

Beyerinck,  M.  W.,  and  Rant,  A. 

Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  15  (1905-06),  366-375. 

Butler,  O. 

Ann.  Bot.,  25  (1911),  97,  107-153. 


95 


Call,  A.  F. 

Proc.  Fruit  Growers’  Conv.  Cal.,  37  (1910),  66-71. 
de  Bussy,  L.  P. 

Meded.  Deli-Proefstat.  Medan,  6 (1911),  2,  77-89. 
Fawcett,  H.  S. 

Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  3,  194-195. 


Cal.  Cult.,  42  (1914),  4,  99-102. 

Griffin,  F.  L. 

Science,  n.  ser.,  34  (1911),  879,  615-616. 

Gruss,  J. 

Jahrb.  Wiss.  Bot.,  47  (1909-10),  393-430. 

— and  Sorauer,  P. 

Notizbl.  K.  Bot.  Gartens  u.  Mus.  Berlin,  5 (1910),  47,  188-197. 

Honing,  J.  A. 

Meded.  Deli-Proefstat.  Medan,  6 (1911),  1,  1-30;  7 (1912),  1,  1-11. 

Rant,  A. 

Inaug.  Diss.  Amsterdam,  1906;  abs.  in  Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  17  (1907), 
3,  179-180. 

Ruhland,  W. 

Ber.  Deut.  Bot.  Gesell.,  25  (1907),  6,  302-315. 

Sorauer,  P. 

Landw.  Jahrb..  41  (1911),  1,  131-162;  42  (1912),  5,  719-750;  abs.  in  Bot. 
Gaz.,  54  (1912),  2,  173-174. 

Wolf,  F.  A. 

Plant  World,  15  (1912),  3,  60-66. 

Young,  H.  D. 

Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  3,  195-196. 

(See  also  Beet,  Cherry,  Citrus,  Peach,  Pear,  Plum,  Sugar  Cane,  and  Tobacco.) 

HAIL  INJURY 

General 

Phillips,  J.  H. 

Trans.  Acad.  Sci.  St.  Louis,  19  (1910),  3,  49-56. 

Sampson,  H.  C. 

Trans,  and  Proc.  Bot.  Soc.  Edinburgh,  22  (1902),  pt.  2,  254-257. 

Voges,  E. 

Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  36  (1913),  19-25,  532-567. 


Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  22  (1912),  8,  457-462. 

HEAT  INJURY 

General 


Jones,  L.  R. 

Vt.  Sta.  Rpt.  1900,  281-282 


96 


Munch,  E. 

Naturw.  Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Landw.,  11  (1913),  12,  557-562. 


Naturw.  Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Landw.,  12  (1914),  4,  169-188. 
von  Tubeuf,  C. 

Naturw.  Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Landw.,  12  (1914),  2,  67-88;  4,  161-169. 


ICE-STORM  INJURY 


General 


Chapman,  H.  H. 

Forestry  and  Irrig.,  8 (1902),  3,  130. 


INTUMESCENCE 


General 


Dale,  E. 

Phil.  Trans.  R.  Soc.  London,  ser.  B,  198  (1906). 


Phil.  Trans.  R.  Soc.  London,  ser.  B,  194  (1901). 


Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  16  (1906),  232. 

Kuster,  E. 

Ber.  Deut.  Bot.  Gesell.,  21  (1901),  452-458. 

SORAUER,  P. 

Ber.  Deut.  Bot.  Gesell.,  19  (1901),  115-119. 
Trotter,  A. 

Annali  di  Botanica,  1 (1904),  123-133. 

VON  ScHRENK,  H. 

Mo.  Bot.  Gard.  Ann.  Rpt.,  16  (1905),  125-148. 
(See  also  Tomato  (Oedema),  Manihot,  and  Potato.) 

LEAF  SCORCH 

(See  Apricot,  Beet,  Cauliflower,  and  Cherry.) 


LETTUCE 


Tipburn 


Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  (Hatch)  Sta.  Rpt.  1897,  82-84. 

— — and  Smith,  R.  £. 

Mass.  (Hatch)  Sta.  Bui.  69  (1900). 


LILY 

,TT  . Bermuda  Lily  Disease 

Woods,  A.  F. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Phys.  and  Path.  Bui.  14  (1897). 


MAIZE 

, , _ Chlorosis 

Maze,  P. 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris).  153  (1911),  19.  902-905. 


97 


Baur,  E. 

MALLOW 

Chlorosis 

Ber.  Deut.  Bot.  Gesell.,  24  (1906),  8,  416-428. 

Sitzber.  K.  Preuss.  Akad.  Wiss,  1906,  1;  abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl.,  103  (1906), 


2,  21. 

MANIHOT 

(Edema 

Wolf,  F.  A.,  and  Lloyd,  F.  E. 

Phytopath,  2 (1912),  4,  131-134. 


Fulton,  H.  S. 

Ga.  Sta.  Bui.  57  (1902). 

MELON 

Tipburn 

Sturgis,  W.  C. 

MOSAIC 

General 

Conn.  Sta.  Rpt.  1898,  256-263. 

Vallillo,  G. 

Ztschr.  Infektionskrank.  u.  Hyg.  Haustiere,  9 (1911),  6,  433-479. 
Woods,  A.  F. 

Science,  n.  ser,  11  (1900),  262,  17-19. 

Centbl.  Bakt,  2 Abt,  5 (1899),  22,  745. 

(See  also  Beet,  Cucumber,  Peanut,  Pepper,  Tobacco,  and  Tomato.) 


(See  Cereal.) 

OATS 

Norton,  J.  B.  S. 

PEACH 

Crown  Swelling 

Phytopath,  1 (1911),  2,  53-54. 

Dropsical  Swelling 

( ) 

Ohio  Sta.  Bui.  92  (1898). 

Fruit  Crack,  or  Sun  Scald 

Rolfs,  F.  M. 

Mo.  Fruit  Sta.  Bui.  17  (1911). 


Taft,  L.  R. 

Gummosis 

Mich.  Sta.  Rpt.  1896,  123-124. 


98 


Taft,  L.  R. 

Mich.  Sta.  Rpt.  1897,  96. 


Mich.  Sta.  Bui.  156  (1898). 

Little  Peach 

Blake,  M.  A. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Bui.  226  (1910). 

Caesar,  L. 

Ontario  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  201  (1912  V 
Taft,  L.  R. 

Mich.  Sta.  Rpt.  1896,  121-122. 


Mich.  Sta.  Bui.  156  (1898). 


( 


Mechanical  Injuries 


) 

Ohio  Sta.  Bui.  92  (1898). 


Rosette 

Bogne,  E.  D. 

Okla.  Sta.  Bui.  20  (1896). 

Evans,  P. 

Mo.  Fruit  Sta.  Bui.  11  (1905). 

Johnson,  W.  G. 

Md.  Sta.  Bui.  42  (1896). 

Smith,  E.  F. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Path.  Bui.  1 (1891). 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Jour.  Mycol.,  6 (1891),  4,  143-148. 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Jour.  Mycol.,  7 (1894),  3,  226-232. 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Farmers’  Bui.  17  (1894). 


Starnes,  H.  N. 

Ga.  Sta.  Bui.  42  (1898). 


Bain,  S.  M. 

Tenn.  Sta.  Bui.  15  (1902). 


Spray  Injury 


Science,  n.  ser.,  14  (1901),  221-222;  Bot.  Gaz.,  33  (1902),  244-245. 


Tenn.  Sta.  Bui.  8 (1895). 
Card,  F.  W.,  and  Stene,  A.  E. 

R.  I.  Sta.  Rpt.  1903,  223-224. 
Groth,  B.  H.  A. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Bui.  232  (1910). 


99 


Sturgis,  W.  C. 

Conn.  Sta.  Rpt.,  24  (1900),  219-254. 


( ) 

Ohio  Sta.  Bui.  92  (1898). 


Twig  Spots 


Yellows 

Bailey,  L.  H. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  25  (1890). 


N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  75  (1894). 
Beckwith,  M.  H. 

Del.  Sta.  Rpt.  1893,  152-153. 

Blake,  M.  A. 

N.  J.  Sta.  Bui.  226  (1910). 

Butz,  G.  C. 

Pa.  Sta.  Bui.  37  (1896). 

Clinton 

Conn.  Sta.  Rpt.,  31-32  (1907-08),  877. 

Corbett,  L.  C. 

W.  Va.  Sta.  Bui.  66  (1900). 

Essig,  E.  O. 

Mo.  Bui.  Com.  Hort.  Cal..  1 (1912),  8,  337-359. 
Hutchins,  E. 

Better  Fruit,  5 (1910),  1,  64-65. 

Johnson,  W.  G. 

Md.  Sta.  Bui.  42  (1896). 

Maynard,  S.  T. 

Mass.  (Hatch)  Sta.  Bui.  8 (1890). 

Morse,  E.  W.,  and  Fetzer,  L.  W. 

Abs.  in  Science,  n.  ser.,  35  (1912),  897,  393. 


Bui.  Bussey  Inst.,  3 (1901),  1,  12. 

Phillips,  J.  L. 

Rpt.  State  Ent.  and  Plant  Path.  Va.,  7 (1908-09),  56-98. 
Powell,  G.  H. 

Del.  Sta.  Rpt.  1897,  168-173. 

Selby,  A.  D. 

Ohio  Sta.  Bui.  92  (1898). 


Ohio  Sta.  Bui.  104  (1899). 

Smith,  E.  F. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Path.  Bui.  1 (1891). 


. IOO 


Smith,  E.  F. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Farmers’  Bui.  17  (1894). 


Rpt.  Chief  of  Section  Veg.  Path.  Washington  1890. 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Path.  Bui.  4 (1893). 
Starnes,  H.  N. 

Ga.  Sta.  Bui.  42  (1898). 

Sturgis,  William 

Conn.  Sta.  Bui.  Ill  (1892). 


Conn.  Sta.  Bui.  115  (1893). 

Taft,  L.  R. 

Mich.  Sta.  Bui.  103  (1894). 

Waite,  M.  B. 

Abs.  in  Science,  n.  ser.,  31  (1910),  803,  798-799. 

( ) 

N.  J.  Sta.  Rpt.  1898,  357-359. 

( ) 

N.  J.  Sta.  Rpt.  1899,  417-418. 

( ) 

N.  C.  Sta.  Bui.  92  (1893). 

( ) 

N.  C.  Sta.  Bui.  120  (1895). 


PEANUT 

General 

Rutgers,  A.  A.  L. 

Dept.  Landb.  Nijv.  an  Handel  (Dutch  East  Indies)  Meded.  Afdell.  Plan- 
tenziekten,  1913,  6,  5. 

Zimmerman,  A. 

Pflanzer,  3 (1907),  9,  129-133. 


PEAR 

Chlorosis 

Schellenberg,  H. 

Landw.  Jahrb.  Schweiz,  26  (1912),  6,  432-437. 

Frost  Injury 

Crandall,  C.  S. 

Colo.  Sta.  Bui.  41  (1898). 

Jones,  L.  R. 

Vt.  Sta.  Bui.  49  (1895). 

Smith,  R.  E. 

Mo.  Weather  Rev.,  39  (1911),  8,  1257. 
Sturgis,  W.  C. 

Conn.  Sta.  Rpt.,  19  (1895),  190. 


IOI 


PECAN 


Rosette 

Orton,  W.  A.,  and  Rand,  F.  V. 

Jour.  Agr.  Research,  3 (1914),  2. 


PEPPER 


Mosaic 


ScHWARZE,  C.  A. 

Abs.  in  Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  1,  42. 


PLUM 

Frost  Cracks  and  Sun  Scald 


Chester,  F.  D. 

Del.  Sta.  Bui.  57  (1902). 

( ) 

Cal.  Sta.  Bui.  41  (1898). 

Gummosis 

Hedrick,  U.  P. 

Ore.  Sta.  Bui.  45  (1897). 

Selby,  A.  D. 

Ohio  Sta.  Bui.  79  (1897). 


Yellows 


Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  (Hatch)  Sta.  Rpt.  1903,  35. 


POTATO 


Bruise 

Horne,  A.  S. 

Jour.  Roy.  Hort.  Soc.  (London),  38  (1912),  1,  37-51. 

Internal  Brown  Rot  and  Black  Heart 

Bartholomew,  E.  T. 

Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  3,  180-182. 


Green,  S.  B. 

Minn.  Sta.  Bui.  39  (1894)  ; Bui.  45  (1895). 
Horne,  A.  S. 

Ann.  Mycol.,  7 (1909),  3,  286-288. 

Stewart,  F.  C. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  101 ; Rpt.  1896,  511. 

( ) 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  16  (1909),  8,  647-648. 


Intumescence  and  Hypertrophy 

Douglas,  Gertrude  E. 

Bot.  Gaz.,  43  (1907),  4,  233-250. 

Fucsko,  M. 

Bot.  Kozlem  (Budapest),  11  (1912),  1,  14-29. 


102 


Leaf  Roll 


Appel,  O. 

Jahresber.  Ver.  Angew.  Bot.,  6 (1908),  259-265. 

and  Krutz,  W. 

Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  8 (1909),  15-17. 


and  SCHLUMBERGER,  O. 

Deut.  Landw.  Gesell.,  190  (1911),  102-108. 


Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  12  (1912),  14-15. 


Mitt.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  11  (1911),  13-15;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt., 
2 Abt.,  32  (1912),  6-12,  321-322. 


Deut.  Landw.  Gesell.,  190  (1911). 


Bohutinsky-Krizevci,  G. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchw.  Osterr.,  13  (1910),  7,  607-633 


Monatsh.  Landw.,  2 (1909),  118;  abs  in  Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  24  (1909), 
23-25,  575-576. 

Doby,  G. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  22  (1912),  7,  401-403. 


Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  21  (1911),  1-2,  10-17. 


Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  22  (1912),  4,  204-211. 


Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  21  (1911),  6,  321-336. 

Fitch,  C.  L. 

Proc.  Soc.  Hort.  Sci.,  9 (1912),  44-51. 

Hedlund,  T. 

Tidski.  Landtman,  31  (1910),  512-515,  532-541;  abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl.,  114 
(1910),  22,  567-568. 

Himmelbaur,  W. 

Osterr.  Ungar.  Ztschr.  Zuckerindus.  u.  Landw.,  41  (1912),  5,  714-716;  6, 
944-976. 

Kock,  G. 

Abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  26  (1910),  25,  697-698. 

and  Kornauth,  K. 

Monatsh.  Landw.,  3 (1910),  12,  365-369. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchw.  Osterr.,  14  (1911),  5,  759-805. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  15  (1912),  3,  179-247. 

Kock,  Kornauth,  and  Broz 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  16  (1913),  3,  89-140;  Bot.  Centbl.,  123 
(1913),  8,  200. 


103 


Kornauth,  K.,  and  Reitmar,  O. 

Monatsh.  Landw.,  2 (1909).  78;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt..  2 Abt.,  24  (1909). 
23-25,  573-574. 

Orton,  W.  A. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  64  (1914). 

Abs.  in  Phytopath.,  3 (1913),  1.  69. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  109  (1913). 

OSTERSPEN 

Mitt.  Deut.  Landw.  Gesell,  26  (1911).  18.  222-224. 

Quanjer,  H.  M. 

Mededeelingen,  Ryks  Hoogere  Land,  Tuin-en  Boschboueoschool,  Wagen- 
nigen,  deel  6,  afl.  2,  1913,  41-80. 

Reitmar,  O. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchw.  Osterr,  16  (1913),  6,  653-717. 

Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  13  (1910),  4,  190-197. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  13  (1910),  4,  190-197. 

Ztschr.  Landw.  Versuchsw.  Osterr.,  15  (1912),  1,  1-106. 

Remy,  T.,  and  Schneider,  G. 

Fiihling’s  Landw.  Ztg.,  58  (1909),  6,  201-219. 

Schander,  R. 

Jahresber.  Ver.  Angew.  Bot.,  7 (1909),  235-245. 

Ber.  West.  Preuss.  Bot.  Zool.  Ver.,  32  (1910),  70-77. 

and  Tiesenhausen,  M. 

Mitt.  Kaiser  Wilhelms  Inst.  Landw.  Bromberg,  6 (1914),  2,  115-124. 

Schmid,  A. 

Illus.  Landw.  Ztg.,  31  (1911),  17,  160;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  31 
(1911),  11-15,  331-332. 

Schmidt,  E.  W. 

Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  36  (1909),  99,  1051. 

SoRAUER,  P. 

Internat.  Phytopath.  Dienst.  Beigabe  zu  Zeitschrift  fur  Pflanzenkrank. 
Jahrb.,  1 (1908),  33-59. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  23  (1913),  4,  244-253. 

Spieckermann,  A. 

Jahresber.  Ver.  Angew.  Bot..  8 (1910),  1-19,  173-177;  abs.  in  Centbl.  Bakt., 
2 Abt,  31  (1911),  23-25. 

Stormer,  K. 

Jahresber.  Ver.  Angew.  Bot..  7 (1909),  119-170. 


104 


Stormer,  K.  and  Morgenthaler,  O. 

Naturw.  Ztschr.  Forst  u.  Landw.,  9 (1911),  12,  521-551. 
Vanha,  J. 

Monatsh.  Landw.,  3 (1910),  9,  268-276. 

Voges,  E. 

Fiihling’s  Landw.  Ztg.,  61  (1912),  16,  542-553. 
von  Beke,  L. 

Jahresber.  Ver.  Angew.  Bot.,  10  (1912),  145-155. 


Pimply  Potatoes 


Stewart,  F.  C. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  101;  Rpt.  1896,  447-521. 


Ring  Disease 


Mayer,  A. 

Jour.  Landw.,  55  (1907),  4,  301-304. 


Spray  Injury 

Lutman,  B.  F. 

Vt.  Sta.  Bui.  162  (1912). 

Munn,  M.  T. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  352  (1912). 
Orton,  W.  A.,  and  Field,  E.  C. 

Abs.  in  Science,  n.  ser.,  31  (1910),  803,  796. 
Stewart,  F.  C.,  and  French,  G.  T. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  347  (1912). 
Stewart,  F.  C.,  and  Gloyer,  W.  O. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  369  (1913). 

Tipburn 

Galloway,  B.  T. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Farmers’  Bui.  91  (1899). 
Jones,  L.  R. 

Vt.  Sta.  Bui.  49  (1895)  ; Bui.  72  (1899). 

QUINCE 

Blotch 

Brooks,  C. 

Phytopath,  3 (1913),  4,  249-250. 

Frost  Blisters 

Stewart,  F.  C,  and  Eustace,  H.  J. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  220  (1902). 

RASPBERRY 

Yellows 

Howitt,  J.  E. 

Canad.  Hort,  36  (1913),  10,  237-238. 
Melchers,  L.  E. 

Ohio  Nat,  14  (1914),  6.  281-288. 


105 

RICE 

(See  Cereal.) 

ROSE 

Bronzing  of  Leaves 

Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  (Hatch)  Sta.  Rpt.  1899,  156-159. 

( ) 

N.  J.  Sta.  Rpt.  1891,  303-304. 

ROSETTE 

(See  Apple,  Peach,  and  Pecan.) 

SMOKE  AND  GAS  INJURIES;  INJURIES  FROM  INDUSTRIAL 

WORKS 

Cement  Dust 

Anderson,  P.  J. 

Abs.  in  Phytopath.,  2 (1912),  1,  45. 

Parish,  S.  B. 

Plant  World,  13  (1910),  12,  288-291. 

Pierce,  G.  J. 

Plant  World,  13  (1910),  12,  283-288. 


Science,  n.  ser.,  30  (1909),  775,  652-654. 

Coal  Tar 

Ewert,  R. 

Ber.  K.  Lehranst.  Obst  u.  Gartenbau  Proskau,  1911,  76. 

Gatin,  C.  L. 

Abs.  in  Internat.  Inst.  Agr.  (Rome),  Bui.  Bur.  Agr.  Intel,  and  Plant  Dis- 
eases, 3 (1912),  7,  1670-1672. 

Flue  Dust 

Hasselhoff,  E. 

Chem.  Centbl.,  2 (1907),  21,  1755-1756;  Jour.  Chem.  Soc.  (London),  92 
(1907),  541,  II,  905-906. 


Fuhling’s  Landw.  Ztg..  57  (1908),  18,  609-615. 

Gas 

Knight,  L.  I.,  Rose,  R.  C.,  and  Crocker,  W. 

Abs.  in  Science,  n.  ser.,  31  (1910),  799,  635-636. 
Osterhout,  W.  J.  V. 

Univ.  Cal.  Pub.  Bot.,  3 (1908),  4,  339-340. 

Illuminating  Gas 
Crocker,  W.,  and  Knight,  L.  I. 

Bot.  Gaz.,  46  (1908),  4,  259-276. 

Shonnard,  F. 

Yonkers,  N.  Y. ; Dept.  Public  Works,  1903. 


io6 


Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1912,  pt.  1,  45-60. 


Bakke,  A.  L. 

Ia.  Sta.  Bui.  145  (1913). 


Smoke 


Bokorny,  T. 

Chem,  Ztg.,  36  (1912),  111,  1050-1051;  abs.  in  Jour.  Chem.  Soc.  (London), 
102  (1912),  600,  11,  980. 


Buckhout 

Pa.  State  Col.  Pub.  1900. 


Crowther,  C. 

Jour.  Roy.  Hort.  Soc.  (London),  38  (1913),  3,  461-468. 

— — — — and  Ruston,  A.  G. 

Jour.  Agr.  Sci.,  4 (1911),  1,  25-55. 

— — and  Stewart,  D.  W. 

Jour.  Agr.  Sci.  (England),  5 (1913),  4,  391-408. 
Ebaugh,  W.  C. 

Jour.  Amer.  Chem.  Soc.,  29  (1907),  951-970. 

Gerlach 

Forst  u.  Jagdw.,  40  (1908),  7,  429-437. 

Haywood,  J.  K. 

Jour.  Amer.  Chem.  Soc.,  29  (1907),  7,  998-1009. 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Chem.  Bui.  89  (1905). 
Hedgcock,  G.  G. 

Jour.  Wash.  Acad.  Sci.,  4 (1914),  4,  70-71. 


Knight,  L.  I.,  and  Crocker,  W. 
Bot.  Gaz.,  55  (1913),  5,  337-371. 


Abs.  in  Science,  n.  ser.,  37  (1913),  949,  380. 

McClelland,  E.  H. 

Mellon  Inst.  Indus.  Research  Smoke  Invest.  Bui.  2 (1913),  58-71. 

Muller,  H.  C.,  et  al. 

Kontroll  u.  Vers.  Pflanzenkrank.  Prov.  Sachsen,  1910,  20-22. 

Ber.  Agr.  Chem.  Kontroll  u.  Vers.  Stat.  Pflanzenkrank.  Prov.  Sachsen, 
1912,  19-22. 

Ruston,  A.  G.,  and  Crowther,  C. 

Rpt.  Brit.  Assoc.  Adv.  Sci.  1910,  577-578. 

Sabachnikoff,  V. 

Contribution  a l’Rtude  des  Fumees  et  des  Poussieres  Industrielles  dans 
leurs  Rapports  avec  la  Vegetation.  Thesis,  Univ.  Nancy,  1913,  1-252. 

Schroter,  F. 

Tharand.  Forstl.  Jahrb.,  57  (1907),  2,  211-430. 

SORAUER,  P. 

Landw.  Jahrb.,  33  (1904),  4-5,  585-664. 


io7 


Stone,  G.  E.,  and  Monahan,  N.  F. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1906,  115. 

Swain,  R.  E.,  and  Harkins,  W.  D. 

Jour.  Amer.  Chem.  Soc.,  30  (1908),  6,  915-928. 
von  Rusnov,  P. 

Centbl.  Gesam.  Forstw.,  36  (1910),  6,  257-268. 

Widtsoe,  J.  A. 

Utah  Sta.  Bui.  88  (1903). 

Tarred  Roads 

Claussen,  P. 

Arb.  K.  Biol.  Anst.  Land  u.  Forstw.,  8 (1913),  5,  493-514. 

Gatin,  C.  L. 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  153  (1911),  15,  688-690;  153  (1911),  3, 
202-204. 


Ann.  Sci.  Nat.  Bot.,  9 ser.,  15  (1912),  2-4,  165-262. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  22  (1912),  4,  193-204. 

Griffon,  E. 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  151  (1910),  23,  1070-1073. 

Mirande,  M. 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  151  (1910),  21,  949-952. 

Tobacco  Smoke 

Molisch,  H. 

Anzeiger  K.  Akad.  Wiss.  Wien,  Math.  Naturw.  Kl.,  1911,  2,  20-22;  abs.  in 
Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  31  (1911),  11-15,  380-381. 

SPRAY  INJURY 

General 

Ball,  E.  D. 

Gem  State  Rural,  14  (1909),  10,  6-8. 

Ballou,  F.  H. 

Ohio  Sta.  Bui.  240  (1912). 

Beach,  S.  A.,  and  Bailey,  L.  H. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  196  (1900). 

Bonns,  W.  W. 

Me.  Sta.  Bui.  198  (1912). 

Clark,  J.  F. 

Bot.  Gaz,  33  (1902),  1,  26-48. 

Crandall,  C.  S. 

111.  Sta.  Bui.  135  (1909). 

Evans,  W.  H. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Phys.  and  Path.  Bui.  10  (1896). 

Ewert,  R. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank  . 22  (1912),  5,  257-285. 


io8 


Fairchild,  D.  G. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Phys.  and  Path.  Bui.  6 (1894). 
Gimingham,  C.  T. 

Chem.  World,  1 (1912),  11,  363-364. 

Grossenbacher,  J.  G. 

N.  Y.  Sta.  Tech.  Bui.  12. 

Headden,  W.  P. 

Colo.  Sta.  Bui.  157  (1910). 


Colo.  Sta.  Bui.  131  (1908). 

Hedrick,  U.  P. 

N.  Y.  (Geneva)  Sta.  Bui.  287  (1907). 

Hewitt,  J.  L. 

Ark.  Sta.  Bui.  114  (1913), 

PlSOVSCHI,  E. 

Rev.  Gen.  Sci.,  24  (1913),  21,  787-788. 

Safro,  V.  I. 

Ore.  Sta.  Research  Bui.  2 (1913). 

Salmon,  E.  S. 

Jour.  Bd.  Agr.  (London),  17  (1910),  2,  103-113. 

Schander,  R. 

Landw.  Jahrb.,  33  (1904),  517. 

Scott,  W.  M. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Circ.  27  (1909). 
Selby,  A.  D. 

Ohio  State  Hort.  Soc.  Ann.  Rpt.,  43  (1910),  77-88. 

Stewart,  J.  P. 

Advance  Rpt.  Conn.  Pomol.  Soc.,  21  (1912). 

Stone,  G.  E. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1909,  pt.  2,  46-47. 

Swingle,  W.  T. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Div.  Veg.  Phys.  and  Path.  Bui.  9 (1896). 
Wallace,  E. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  288  (1910). 

— , Blodgett,  F.  M.,  and  Nessler,  L.  R. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  290  (1911). 

Watkins,  O.  S. 

111.  Sta.  Circ.  159  (1912). 

WlLKEN,  F.  W. 

Mich.  Sta.  Rpt.  1911,  184-146. 

(See  also  Apple,  Grape,  Peach,  and  Potato.) 

SUGAR  CANE 

Chlorosis 

Gile,  P.  L.,  and  Ageton,  C.  N. 

Porto  Rico  Sta.  Rpt.  1913,  13-14. 


109 


Sereh 

Zeylstra,  H.  H. 

Ber.  Deut.  Bot.  Gesell.,  29  (1911),  6,  330-333. 

( ) 

Agr.  News  (Barbados),  10  (1911),  241,  238-239. 

SUN  SCALD 

(See  Apple,  Peach,  Plum,  and  Potato.) 

SYRINGA 

Leaf  Roll 

Laubert,  R. 

Gartenflora,  63  (1914),  1,  9-11. 

TOBACCO 

Gummosis 

Honing,  J.  A. 

Meded.  Deli-Proefstat.  Medan,  5 (1911),  6,  169-185. 


Meded.  Deli-Proefstat.  Medan,  5 (1910),  1,  24. 


Leaf  Curl 


Ludwig,  K. 

Ber.  Deut.  Bot.  Gesell.,  31  (1913),  9,  536-546. 


Mosaic 


Allard,  H.  A. 

Jour.  Agr.  Research,  3 (1915),  4. 


U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Bui.  40  (1913). 


Science,  n.  ser.,  36  (1912),  938,  875-876. 

Beyerinck,  W.  W. 

Sep.  Verhandel.  K.  Akad.  Wetensch.  Amsterdam,  1898;  abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl., 
78  (1899),  5,  146-151;  abs.  also  in  Jour.  Roy.  Micros.  Soc.  (London)  1899,  3, 
319-320. 


Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  5 (1899),  1,  27-33. 

Bouygnes  and  Perreau 

Compt.  Rend.  Acad.  Sci.  (Paris),  139  (1904),  4,  309-310 
Chapman,  G.  H. 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.  1912,  pt.  2,  41-51. 

Heintzel,  K. 

Inaug.  Diss.,  Erlangen,  1900. 

Hunger,  F.  W. 

Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  15  (1905),  257-311. 


Bui.  de  l’lnst.  Bot.  de  Buitenzorg  17  (1903). 


1 10 


I WAN0SKY,  D. 

Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  7 (1901),  4,  148. 


Bui.  Acad.  Imp.  Sci.  St.  Petersburg,  35  (1892),  1,  67-70. 


Ztschr.  Pflanzenkrank.,  13  (1903),  1-41. 

Jensen,  H. 

Centbl.  Bakt.,  2 Abt.,  15  (1905),  13-14,  440-445. 
Johnson,  J. 

Wis.  Sta.  Bui.  237  (1914). 

Lodewijics,  J.  A. 

Abs.  in  Bot.  Centbl.,  114  (1910),  20,  518. 

Loew 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Rpt.  65  (1900),  11-25. 

Mayer,  A. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.  Jour.  Mycol.,  7 (1894),  4,  333-378. 
Selby,  A.  D. 

Ohio  Sta.  Bui.  156  (1904). 

Stone  and  Chapman 

Mass.  Sta.  Rpt.,  22  (1907),  120-150. 

Sturgis,  W.  C. 

Conn.  Sta.  Rpt.  1898,  242-260. 

Woods,  A.  F. 

U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  Plant  Indus.  Bui.  18  (1902). 


Abs.  in  Sci.,  n.  ser.,  13  (1901),  320,  247-248. 


Science,  n.  ser.,  11  (1900),  262,  17-19. 


TOMATO 

Blossom-end  Rot 

Brooks,  C. 

Abs.  in  Phytopath.,  4 (1914),  1,  49. 

Smith,  Elizabeth  H. 

Mass.  Sta.  Tech.  Bui.  3 (1907). 

Stucky,  H.  P.,  and  Temple,  J.  C. 

Ga.  Sta.  Bui.  96  (1911). 

Dropping  of  Buds 

Rogers,  S.  S. 

Cal.  Sta.  Bui.  239  (1913). 

Rolfs,  P.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  47  (1898);  Bui.  117  (1913). 


Hollow  Stem 


Rolfs,  P.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  47  (1898);  Bui.  117  (1913). 


1 1 1 

Mosaic 

Melchers,  L.  E. 

Ohio  Nat.,  13  (1913),  8,  149-175. 

Westerdijk,  Johanna 

Meded.  Phytopath.  Lab.  “Willie  Commelin  Scholten,”  1910;  abs.  in  Ztschr 
Pflanzenkrank.,  20  (1910),  7,  425-426. 

CEdema 

Atkinson,  G.  F. 

N.  Y.  (Cornell)  Sta.  Bui.  53  (1893). 

Rolfs,  P.  H. 

Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  47  (1898). 


Fla.  Sta.  Bui.  117  (1913). 


YELLOWS 

(See  Aster,  Oats,  Peach,  Plum,  and  Raspberry.) 


(See  Cereal.) 


WHEAT 


WIND 


Meyer,  F.  J. 

Naturw.  Wchnschr.,  28  (1913),  38.  599-606 


ILLINOIS  AGRICULTURAL  EXPERIMENT  STATION 

November,  1915 


Abstract  of  Circular  184  entitled 

THE  PRAIRIE  SPIRIT  IN 
LANDSCAPE  GARD  EN  ING 

By  WILHELM  MILLER 

DIVISION  OF  LANDSCAPE  EXTENSION,  DEPARTMENT  OF  HORTICULTURE 


An  early  effort  towards  a prairie  style  of  architecture  and  landscape  gardening 


College  of  Agriculture 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

URBANA 


Abstract  of  Circular  184  entitled 
“THE  PRAIRIE  SPIRIT  IN  LANDSCAPE 
GARDENING” 


“The  Prairie  Spirit  in  Landscape  Gardening”  is  a 36-page  circular  containing 
100  illustrations.  It  is  uniform  with  “The  Illinois  Way  of  Beautifying  the  Farm” 
(Circular  170),  the  page  being  9^x12  inches.  As  this  publication  is^  too  expen- 
sive for  unlimited  free  distribution,  an  abstract  of  it  is  here  given. 

The  aim  of  “The  Prairie  Spirit”  is  to  show  “what  the  people  of  Illinois  have 
done  and  can  do  toward  designing  and  planting  public  and  private  grounds  for 
efficiency  and  beauty.” 

CONTENTS 


CHAPTER 

I — The  Prairie  Style  of  Landscape 
Gardening. 

II — Everyone  Can  Apply  the  Prin- 
ciple of  Conservation. 

III —  A Free  Restoration  of  Ancient 

Illinois. 

IV —  Restoration  Applied  to  Farm- 

stead and  City  Lot. 

V — Restoring  the  Romantic  Types 
of  Illinois  Scenery. 

VI — Can  the  Prairie  be  Restored? 


CHAPTER 

VII — Everyone  Can  Apply  the  Prin- 
ciple of  Repetition. 

VIII — Adapting  the  Prairie  Style  to 
Other  Kinds  of  Scenery. 

IX — Materials  Used  in  the  Prairie 
Style. 

X — Some  Uses  for  Illinois  Materials. 

XI — Literature  of  the  Prairie  Style 
of  Landscape  Gardening. 

XII — The  Showiest  Plants  in  the 
World. 


The  first  eleven  chapters  are  devoted  to  various  phases  of  the  prairie  style  of 
landscape  gardening,  which  aims  to  fit  the  peculiar  scenery,  climate,  soil,  labor, 
and  other  conditions  of  the  prairies,  instead  of  copying  literally  the  manners  and 
materials  of  other  regions. 

The  prairie  style  is  defined  as  “an  American  mode  of  design  based  upon  the 
practical  needs  of  the  middle-western  people  and  characterized  by  preservation 
of  typical  western  scenery,  by  restoration  of  local  color,  and  by  repetition  of  the 
horizontal  line  of  land  or  sky,  which  is  the  strongest  feature  of  prairie 
scenery.”  This  repetition  is  accomplished  by  means  of  “stratified  plants,”  which 
have  strong  horizontal  branches  or  flower  clusters,  like  certain  hawthorns  or 
thorn  apples. 

An  historical  sketch  traces  the  beginnings  of  this  style  back  to  1878,  but  the 
most  characteristic  development  began  in  1901.  Since  then  one  landscape  gar- 
dener has  submitted  an  itemized  list  of  work  amounting  to  $6,000,000,  done  in 
Illinois  and  near-by  states,  which  he  declares  was  “inspired  by  the  prairie.” 
Twenty-seven  of  the  photographs  represent  conscious  efforts  in  the  direction  of  a 
prairie  style.  The  reader  is  free  to  like  these  effects  or  not,  but  he  cannot  say 
that  the  prairie  st)de  is  theoretical,  or  entirely  in  the  future. 

The  prairie  style  is  to  be  distinguished  from  “the  Illinois  way.”  The  former 
is  a mode  of  design ; the  latter  is  not.  The  Illinois  way  of  planting  is  defined  as 
the  use  of  as  high  a proportion  of  plants  native  to  Illinois  as  is  consistent  with 
practical  requirements  and  the  principles  of  design.  In  this  sense  every  state 
in  the  Union  may  have  a “way”  of  its  own  based  upon  its  local  flora.  The  prairie 
style,  however,  is  suitable  only  for  the  Middle  West.  It  is  of  special  interest  to 
Illinois,  because  Illinois  is  the  “Prairie  state.” 

It  is  difficult  for  any  book  to  tell  just  how  to  design  and  plant  any  particular 
place,  because  no  two  places  have  the  same  conditions,  and  therefore  no  two 
places  should  be  planted  in  exactly  the  same  way.  However,  general  principles 
are  here  laid  down  and  nearly  every  chapter  is  summarized  in  the  form  of  one 
or  more  practical  applications  headed  by  the  phrase  “I  Will”  or  “We  Will.”  The 

2 


3 


former  is  a motto  of  Chicago ; the  latter  has  been  suggested  as  a new,  informal 
motto  for  Illinois.  Improvement  organizations  that  are  always  inquiring 
“What  shall  we  do?”  will  find  thirty-two  answers  from  which  they  may  select. 

To  applying  the  principle  of  conservation  Chapter  II  is  devoted.  Six  lines  of 
work  are*  recommended  and  addresses  are  given  of  five  national  and  state 
organizations  that  will  help  local  groups  and  individuals. 

To  applying  the  principle  of  restoration  several  chapters  are  devoted.  “A  Free 
Restoration  of  Ancient  Illinois”  shows  a series  of  landscapes  under  glass,  sug- 
gesting the  beauty  of  vanished  and  disappearing  types  of  scenery.  “Restoring 
the  Romantic  Types  of  Illinois  Scenery”  names  eight  types  different  from  the 
prairie,  (lake  bluffs,  ravines,  river  banks,  ponds,  rocks,  dunes,  woods,  and  road- 
sides), and  gives  examples  of  actual  restorations  in  Illinois.  “Can  the  Prairie  be 
Restored?”  discusses  prairie  parks,  miniature  prairies,  prairie  gardens,  prairie 
borders,  wild  and  cultivated  prairie,  the  broad  and  the  long  views,  and  methods 
of  restoration.  “Restoration  Applied  to  Farmstead  and  City  Lot”  shows  what 
can  be  done  when  little  money  and  space  are  available. 

To  applying  the  principle  of  repetition  Chapter  VII  is  devoted.  This  explains 
how  the  prairie  spirit  has  been  brought  into  the  daily  lives  of  rich  and  poor  in 
city,  suburbs,  and  country  in  all  parts  of  the  Prairie  state. 

The  reader  will  naturally  ask  whether  the  prairie  style  is  only  for  the  prairie. 
Chapter  VIII  replies  that  it  has  already  been  adapted  to  all  other  kinds  of  scenery 
found  in  Illinois.  It  explains  how  to  intensify  each  type  and  how  to  blend  all 
in  one  great  scheme  for  beautifying  Illinois. 

The  materials  used  in  the  prairie  style  are  classified  in  a new  way.  Class  I 
consists  of  stratified  materials  or  symbols  of  the  prairie,  while  Class  II  consists 
of  non-stratified  materials,  which  may  be  reminders  of  Illinois.  The  stratified 
materials  include  34  perennials,  22  shrubs,  12  small  trees,  17  tall  and  medium-high 
trees,  and  2 evergreens — a total  of  87  species  that  have  horizontal  branches, 
flower  clusters,  or  both.  The  non-stratified  materials  number  112,  making  a total 
of  nearly  200  permanent  ornamental  plants  native  to  Illinois.  These  are  all  in 
cultivation  and  may  be  secured  from  the  fourteen  nurserymen  named  or  may  be 
transplanted  from  the  wild  if  necessary  or  desirable. 

Some  practical  uses  for  these  materials  are  briefly  mentioned.  Certain  kinds 
are  suitable  for  such  common  needs  as  foundation  planting,  porch  decoration, 
wall  covering,  framing  the  view  of  the  house,  and  planting  hardy  borders. 
Others  are  suitable  only  for  parks  and  large  estates,  or  for  special  problems  such 
as  arbors,  banks,  bird  gardens,  bluffs,  cut  flowers,  street  trees,  windbreaks,  water 
gardens,  and  peculiar  soils. 

A chapter  on  literature  is  the  last  of  the  series  devoted  to  the  prairie  style  of 
landscape  gardening. 

“The  Showiest  Plants  in  the  World”  deals  with  the  old  problem  of  good  and 
bad  taste  in  a new  spirit.  The  author  assumes  that  the  motives  are  honorable 
and  the  plants  attractive,  and  that  the  whole  question  of  good  taste  is  simply  one 
of  self-restraint  and  fitness.  Guided  by  these  principles  the  reader  may  readily 
decide  what  constitutes  good  or  bad  taste  in  the  use  of  bedding  plants,  annual 
flowers,  variegated  foliage,  everblooming  flowers,  “quick  growers”,  spectacular 
forms,  weeping  trees,  cut-leaved  plants,  double  flowers,  and  formal  plants.  The 
evolution  of  taste  is  described. 

“The  Illinois  Citizen’s  Oath”  is  suggested  by  the  famous  Athenian  oath  which 
was  taken  by  every  young  man  when  he  came  of  age  and  received  the  suffrage. 
The  oath  is  not  recommended  for  any  particular  locality,  but  furnishes  a con- 
venient list  of  the  civic  ideals  that  are  commonly  proposed  by  commercial  clubs 
and  other  improvement  organizations.  A photograph  shows  a spot  in  a park 
suitable  for  public  meetings  of  all  kinds,  including  those  connected  with  the 
bestowal  of  political  power. 

“The  Prairie  Spirit”  expresses,  in  “I  Will”  form,  some  of  the  popular  senti- 
ments about  prairie  scenery  and  its  beautification. 

“A  Short  Ballot  for  Illinois  Citizens”  crystallizes  into  six  suggestions  the  most 
important  improvements  that  should  commonly  be  made  in  home  grounds. 


4 


Educational  work  should  not  be  judged  by  commercial  standards.  The  following 
figures,  however,  are  illuminating  and  encouraging.  At  the  end  of  its  second  year 
the  Division  of  Landscape  Extension  had  5,200  pledges  “to  do  some  permanent 
ornamental  planting  within  a year.”  The  signers  we-re  then  asked  to  report  on 
what  they  had  done.  Replies  were  received  from  991,  or  19  percent.  These 
spent  a total  of  $75,117  on  materials,  grading,  lawn  tools,  etc.  The  average 
expenditure  was  nearly  $76.  The  average  expenditure  of  the  642  persons  who 
spent  less  than  $100  was  $22.  These  results  cannot  be  attributed  entirely  to  the 
Division  of  Landscape  Extension,  because  many  persons,  doubtless,  were  ready 
to  spend  something  on  outdoor  improvements  before  reading  the  literature  or 
hearing  the  lectures. 

The  illustrations  offer  considerable  evidence  that  Illinois  is  developing  a new 
and  appropriate  style  of  beauty.  Of  the  100  pictures,  86  were  taken  in  Illinois, 
only  14  coming  from  other  states.  About  61  are  marked  “Done  in  Illinois”  as  a 
guarantee  that  the  pictures  were  really  taken  in  Illinois,  not  in  other  states,  and 
that  they  were  made  in  cultivation,  not  in  the  wild.  In  other  words  they  repre- 
sent money  spent  by  Illinoisans  in  cultivating  or  preserving  Illinois  species. 

The  beauty  of  the  illustrations  may  tempt  some  inexperienced  persons  to  fancy 
that  “landscape  gardening  is  only  for  parks  and  rich  folks.”  On  the  contrary, 
so  far  as  self-expression  goes,  landscape  gardening  offers  aS  great  an  oppor- 
tunity to  every  living  soul  as  music  does,  or  any  other  fine  art.  Special  care 
has  been  taken  in  every  chapter  to  show  how  people  with  little  money  or  space 
may  apply  the  principles  of  landscape  gardening.  A single  prairie  rose  bush 
beside  the  door  may  be  all  that  some  one  can  afford,  and  that  is  enough  to  sug- 
gest the  prairie  spirit. 

Over  fifty  of  the  pictures  indicate  small  or  moderate  means ; only  ten  indicate 
private  wealth.  About  thirty  involve  public  expenditure,  but  many  of  these  pic- 
tures show  trees  or  shrubs  that  can  be  grown  as  well  by  the  poor  man  as  the 
rich.  Thirty-three  species  of  plants  native  to  Illinois  are  pictured. 

All  sections  of  Illinois  are  represented  by  examples.  So  also  are  farm,  city, 
and  suburb.  Special  effort  has  been  made  to  bring  the  message  home  to  the 
individual  in  the  chapter  called  “Restoration  Applied  to  Farmstead  and  City  Lot.” 
This  indicates  ten  things  which  the  average  farmer  can  do,  and  seven  things  which 
the  average  cit^  lot  owner  may  accomplish.  Of  the  illustrations  twenty-eight  were 
taken  on  the  farm  or  by  country  roads,  eight  show  city  yards,  and  fourteen  were 
taken  in  suburban  home  grounds. 

While  “The  Prairie  Spirit”  was  prepared  primarily  for  the  people  of  Illinois,  its 
principles  are  applicable  thruout  the  Middle  West.  Indeed,  conservation  and 
restoration  are  applicable  everywhere.  This  circular,  therefore,  may  be  of 
national  interest,  especially  in  new  communities  where  people  still  despise  or 
neglect  the  local  flora.  It  may  even  have  some  educational  value  in  regions  where 
none  of  the  middle-western  species  will  grow,  by  setting  people  to  thinking  in 
new  and  constructive  ways  about  their  environment. 

To  prevent  waste  it  is  suggested  that  those  who  desire  copies  of  “The  Prairie 
Spirit’’  use  the  application  blank  below.  If  TThe  Illinois  -Way"  (Ciiculai  i>u)  T5> 
a4&e-dcsired,  arum i 1 ar"To  rflTiniiylTu~-ttse d . 


Department  of  Horticulture 
University  of  Illinois 
Urbana,  Illinois 

If  you  will  send  me  a copy  of  “The  Prairie  Spirit”  (Circular  184) 
I will  do  some  permanent  ornamental  planting  within  a year. 

Name .... - 

Address „ 


► 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS-URBANA 
Q.630.7IL6C  C001 

CIRCULAR  URBANA,  ILL 
155-184  1912-1915  (BDW/O  170) 


3 0112  019531943 


Pr 'vi^K 

